Harry thinks THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN is so almost nearly impossibly amazing, but is actually just sometimes amazing & mostly cool...

I love SPIDER-MAN, the character. Peter Parker was always the alter-ego that I held dear to my own. He just couldn’t seem to catch a break and when he did, it would only lead to greater loss and pain. This can never be expressed more deliberately than through the saga of Gwen Stacy.

This isn’t that final leg of the story, it’s the start. Peter and Gwen are flirting with one another. Both nervously hoping that the other will give them the time of day, but even if they do, what the fuck do you say? Emma Stone’s Gwen Stacy is some sort of miracle for me. I love her. I’ve always liked Emma Stone, but here… with the blonde locks, the hair band, the mini-skirts and the awesome variety of boots that she wears… well, it’s as though she pulled herself off the 4 color inked pages and was delivered on screen intact.

For me. That’s enough right there. If only to see one film that contains the soul of a character that I fell in love with. I loved Gwen Stacy. One of the benefits of growing up in a house filled with complete runs with duplicates of pretty much everything in the silver age… it meant I read these stories in order. That’s how I read SPIDER-MAN.

One of the problems I’ve always had with Hollywood is that they’re always in a rush. They want to get to the big story point that everyone knows. OR even worse they get ham-fisted and try to improve origins by creating a ludicrous amount of intersecting pieces that make the story TOO FUCKING CONVENIENT. Problem with a story that’s too fucking convenient is that you just don’t believe it. That wasn’t a problem with THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN, they’re seeding a multi-film arc that is really going to be something special if they keep the casting & team behind the camera intact. But I feel some folks are seeing that problem with this film. There is a bit of “The Joker created BATMAN” BS from the Burton world – which I’ve always hated. But it is still hidden in shadow, we don’t know what character is yet responsible for the creation of Spidey’s whole situation. But they suggest that in the next film we will.

My overall feeling about THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN is that I genuinely like the movie, I absolutely love Peter, Ben, Aunt May, Gwen Stacy and Captain Stacy. When the movie is fully in those elements, it is shining and I’m smiling like a monkey. I also love the battles and encounters between THE LIZARD and SPIDER-MAN. The fights are so much more Spidey-like to me, and finally an inhuman full on monster villain fighting Spidey!

Andrew Garfield’s Peter Parker & Spider-Man, for me, are far far far closer to what Peter Parker and Spider-Man have always been in my mind. Changing Peter’s origin story worked with the familiar elements – but rewriting Uncle Ben’s immortal lines, it’s like doing Hamlet without TO BE OR NOT TO BE… there’s some things that certain characters must say, talking around the better line only makes you want to cue the actor from your seat. He has a bit of a bratty streak, he does have abandonment issues – and that works well for pre-incident Parker. But the whole parental mystery and the sinister mysteries of OsCorps just didn’t hold my attention. The whole time the story goes in that direction, I’m thinking I wish we were just on a date with Peter and Gwen.

WHAT? I wanted more romance? Yes, I do. You read those old comics and they were all about the angst of being a nerd in a Jock environment – of having girls you can’t believe were interested in you, being interested in you. (Pretty much sums up my whole dating life) I could have used a second dinner at the Stacy residence, but one that went really well with Peter – where he became more invested in Captain Stacy. Captain Stacy was one helluva man in the comics. Dennis does a great job with him, but he is definitely not a very sympathetic man in the film. He’s more Commissioner Gordon than anything. But be assured, it’s Captain Stacy through the film.

One of the big problems with the missing mom & dad story – and the Evil OsCorps stuff… it takes us away from what the real meat of the film could have given us. More alone time with THE LIZARD. I could have gone for Alligators in the sewer, quasi worshipping him as he monologues about how the cold blooded dominance of Earth had been suppressed for 65 million years, but that a Reptilian Renaissance would lead to a new age of the Lizard. Giving a scene like that to Randall Cook, would have resulted in a scene worthy of his Gollum fx legacy – we just were not given enough of it. That THE LIZARD spoke was fantastic, I just wanted more and more character moments with him, when he wasn’t being overtly evil, but manic. Ya know? He’s a Lizard Human and I love it when The Lizard talks to himself and reasons with himself.

I needed THE LIZARD to pull a couple of jobs, headed towards his plan, the Midtown School incident just felt wrong to me. The action was wonderful, Stan Lee has an amazing featured scene. His best yet! I needed to have Peter try to figure it out, all while trying to date the Captain’s daughter. In fact, I would have preferred it had OsCorps had nothing to do with the film, Curt Connors or Spider-Man’s origins or being involved in his parents’ disappearance.

Had the film focused on Parker discovering and mastering his new self, beginning his relationship with Gwen, his lesson, the emergence of Spider-Man, Curt Connors’ involvement with Peter, his transformation, Police hunting both, and the end of the story – it’d been spectacular. They would’ve had more room for Peter & Gwen & her family, more room for THE LIZARD and just less unnecessary BS.

I know, that sounds like I didn’t enjoy it – I really did though – an awful lot. It’s a very emotional story if you know the story. BUT there’s a couple things holding me back from just unabashedly loving it. I’ve already talked about the plot issues. But James Horner… Dammit. He scores the romance impeccably, but his music never races my pulse – that’s just the jaw dropping cinematography and action in the film. We do not have the great SPIDER-MAN theme that none of us have yet heard, but all of us have wanted. I know that’s a small issue, but really… it isn’t. Had this film captured SPIDER-MAN’s spirit encapsulated in musical form as Williams did for SUPERMAN and Elfman did for BATMAN… it would have made me overlook the OsCorps & Parental Mystery completely.

By no means is this film as problematic as SPIDER-MAN 3, by no means. The movie is actually more along the lines of SPIDER-MAN 2… just not that consistent. I’m not in the middle on this one. I can’t wait to take my nephew. He’s gonna love it. Scorekeeper absolutely fell in love with the film. Father Geek liked it a lot. I understand some of the hate for the film. We’re at the point in Superhero Genre filmmaking where doing radical redesign to classic costumes isn’t necessary. Where monkeying with key story elements integral to the character can cause raging. And still… there are some folks that just don’t like Andrew Garfield. I LOVE HIM! I love his take on Parker. Mainly I love the chemistry between him and Gwen/Emma! Box Office-willing, I would kill for 5 more movies all with Emma as Gwen. Stop thinking in trilogy form. Make the world love her more than we ever have loved any Superhero Girlfriend. That’s the character. Make us dream of their old age together. This is such a great start. Teach a new generation what a great BF/GF film relationship is. Then show them how much love can hurt. It’d be amazing! I can be amazing. This is almost amazing.

Actually, I liked INCEPTION, just wanted more awesome in it. Last movie I out right hated was ROCK OF AGES. Tried writing that review. I decided it was a very mean review and given that my film writers unleashed a proper ass-whupping and the film did so poor at the box-office that it was sort of like beating on a bleeding half alive corpse.

That movie was fucking brilliant and I think it was as awesome as it could have possibly been. You fell asleep as I recall and you missed all the rules. Still think they should have did more outlandish things just because they were dreaming? OH WAIT THEY EXPLAINED THAT IF THEY DO STUFF LIKE MAKE A LASER GUN OR A PLASMA SWORD IT ATTRACTS THE PERSONS MIND THEY ARE BREAKING INTO AND THEY GET CAUGHT INSTANTLY! Guess you should have stayed awake during the flim huh? I bet if me and a few other talk backers pulled a mind heist on you we'd see you dreaming about how you'd rather be at home watching a shitty flim like twilight.

dude you fucking like EVERYTHING, please post some negative reviews. The other peeps here gave it a pass and the "the Kidd" fucking liked it.
please feel free to tear it a new asshole and tell people not to see it. That or ban reviewing garbage movies like that which are in no way "COOL". Get with it harry geez, do you know so many people in the "biz" that you don't like offending cmon man.

I've made my peace with the new shoes. Makes some sort of sense. He does all this gymnastic activity and running it makes sense to add a sneaker like shoe to the suit. Granted I wish it wasn't so obvious they are sneakers.

The only thing that I see that works,,,Gwen Stacy.....Period....If we all knew that Mary Jane was gonna be such a Bitch in the Raimi trilogy, Im sure that Gwen coulda been used then.....but instead, you gotta test the fireworks before you know if it's gonna Bomb or not

When I love a flick I want to tell everyone I know so they can share in the awesome. When I see a movie that sucks...I just try to forget about it and focus on finding more awesome. I imagine Knowles is the same way

true my friends.........Im just a die hard Spidey fan......I can go with Garfield over Mcguire...but we need a precise suit, a worthy adversary, and ...J Jonah Jameson!!!!
and no silver on the damn shoes

it's a comic book movie. i used to read new comics every week when i was a kid. 5 years seems like a long fucking time to wait for another Spiderman movie. i mean... this isn't Watchmen or 300 being remade. it's 50 years of comics Spiderman.

SM 4 would have fixed some of the folly..........I dont blame Raimi...I blame the studio, the producers.......because Raimi did great with the first 2.........He originally had other plans with SM 3.......but since he didnt understand Venom and some other attributes.......we got the shit we got

Spidey 2 is note perfect. The thing The Amazing Spider-Man does not do is hit any of the notes. It actually makes the Raimi flicks (even 3) look more honest to the source material, organic web-shooters and all. There are shots in the Raimi flicks that are taken right from the panels of ASM. Harry is god damn right about Gators following the Lizard around the sewers of New York. That would have been absolutely freakin' awesome, even though all the original action took place in Florida in ASM 6. Still, it would have gone a long way in this flick. Garfield is a huge douche. The witty quips come of as whiny dickheadisms. New word - dickheadisms. Anyone reading The Avenging Spider-Man gets a full-on dose of great Spidey humor, but it isn't the kind of humor found in this flick, though the web-slinging is pretty sweet. I like the Lizard, but wanted more. Leary was all right, but give me JJJ anyday. Stone is hot, and I'm a Gwen fan from way back, but a scientist? Bull. The big fucking thing for me is completely fucking up the death of Uncle Ben. Here is the most critical aspect of the Peter Parker character, and it is so totally fucked that the movie was completely ruined. It is as bad as fucking up Kal-El's journey to Earth. It is the single most mythic moment in Spidey lore - the one single thing they should not have fucked up, and they fucked it raw. The shitty costume I can deal with (and the costume sucks my nads), Peter out dicking Flash I can handle (another out of character piece of bullshit - Peter Parker isn't a jerk), No JJJ and the Daily Bugle I can deal with (BUT HOW CAN YOU SKIP THE FUCKING DAILY BUGLE AND JJJ!!!! My God!) But Uncle Ben - yeah, fucking up Uncle Ben's death destroyed this flick for me. I truly hated this movie. Here I am comparing the Raimi films, but screw it - no one took up the challenge. The thing about the Raimi flicks, flaws and all, those flicks FELT right. They FELT like the comics I've loved all my life. There is none of that here. Amazing Spider-Man does not FEEL like the comics I've loved all my life. Nowhere near it.

I'm reading all the reviews and not avoiding spoilers like I normally would. I mean if you don't know the story by now...you know.
I feel no need to get worked up about it. If it's good, great. If it sucks, no big deal we still have Raimi's.

Harry didnt wanna waste time....dint wanna waste energy.....def didnt wanna waste thought on a movie that didnt live up to expectations..............TASM was just a waste of effort......I figured so after they chose someone like Marc Webb to direct the piece (of shit). A bigger named Director woulda worked better......but instead we got a director with a last name that worked out as a pun for the project......not impressed Marvel/Sony! I wanna see SM 4!!!!!!! Id rather see a Vultress (Anne Hathaway) rather that the mediocre Lizard!

The planting of future plot developments screwed with the flow of the narrative. Just tell the damn story. So fucking unnecessary and annoying. All the loose ends is a total cheat and stupid storytelling. Really hated this steaming turd. Even re-reading Harry's review, it's like he's trying to convince himself he liked it even though he knows deep, deep down that it's total been-there-done-that-but-fucked-it-up garbage.

seriously, It doesn't make sense. how can you think it's awesome but mostly not?
It should read
Harry wanted THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN to be so almost nearly impossibly amazing, but found it's actually just sometimes amazing & mostly cool...
There, title fixed and i won't even charge you

I only saw one scene when the lizard spoke, but that scene alone turned me off from the way he does speak. He sounded just like Dr. Connors. I would think that given the changes to his DNA his speech would be affected as well where it is difficult to talk and his speech pattern is more slurred and in a hissing manner.

so I wouldn't judge quality by how many tickets sold first weekend. Hype brings the butts in the seats the first weekend.
Spiderman 3 is ranked 98th in all time grosses (adjusted for ticket price inflation). Spiderman 1 is ranked 36 and Spiderman 3 is ranked 54.

And I quote: "I could have gone for Alligators in the sewer, quasi worshipping him as he monologues about how the cold blooded dominance of Earth had been suppressed for 65 million years, but that a Reptilian Renaissance would lead to a new age of the Lizard. Giving a scene like that to Randall Cook, would have resulted in a scene worthy of his Gollum fx legacy – we just were not given enough of it." Again, Harry, just let me say, what the fuck? That's Batman and Robin shit right there. That's Poison Ivy talking to her plants right before Chris O'Donnell zips up his nippled Robin suit. I'm accustomed to your reviews sucking, but now you're also pleading for horrific filmmaking? Why do you hate quality cinema?

hands down the worst film reviewer on the planet...
I dont even have to read the reviews anymore...
blah blah blah my childhood blah blah blah i love it
stop worrying about your childhood and start worrying about walking you meaty breasted zilch

I been coming to this site for probably longer than any other site on the internet. Over a decade easily. And I hate to go along with these assholes who are running ya down but come on man.
I know you have a lot of contacts now, but I remember when I could get an honest to goodness review here. You had a lot of the same tastes as I did but now this place is either it wasn't so bad or it was fucking awesome.
What gives man? Either get back to writing good ole fashioned fucking reviews or give it up to someone who can bash a little and not have to worry about ruining friendships.
I love ya bro but you can't keep going this way and call this place fucking cool. That is all.

The one thing I agree with you on is that filmmakers do need to stop thinking in trilogy form. I still might see the film. Might being the operative word, but I just can't get excited for it. I hope it's good, honestly. I don't want to be a blind cynic and it would be great to see the Gwen/Peter story fully realized, but for it to have the impact it needs the conclusion will have to come in the 3rd film. We all know how Sony treats its successful properties. By the 3rd Amazing Spider-Man they might be looking to ditch Webb, Garfield and Stone.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/32597
I get it, he loves the character ( as do i), but i think that may cloud his judgement.
So with the greatest of respect, I'm going to take this review with a pinch of salt.

Harry runs a website reviewing films both good and bad. Too just ignore the ones he really dislikes isn't fair for the people who use his site expecting honest reviews. From a personal perspective of course I agree with you when you like a film you want to talk about it.

July 2, 2012, 3:03 a.m. CST

by Dale

He knows Rami and Avi and a bunch of those guys.
So of course he isn't going to bad mouth them. I don't blame them but still if a turds a turd. You got to call it that.
I may have only signed up recently but trust me, I have been here for over a decade and this is really starting to annoy me.
You site grew because you told people how it is. If you liked something and it got changed or shitcanned you let people know. Hell you changed the industry to some degree. Before you there were little to no recognition for online sites.
I even love those tv things you do in the basement. Just stick to those or start reviewing shit strait up. Those guys you know will forgive ya or they won't but at least they know your strait.

I've got to think that Harry is somehow on Sony's payroll and is having to write less than genuine reviews so he can make some money to pay his medical bills and put food his mouth....maybe not outright payola but something close to that. And I obviously don't know that for a fact and it is pure speculation but I just don't see Harry genuinely liking this crappy movie. And no I haven't seen the whole thing but about 1/4 of it from all clips out there.
Anyway Harry runs a cool site and I like his new youtube series...can't hate on him if he is not being truthful but just saying..

Harry seems to want to always ignore the bad in film rather than examine it, critique it and hold it up to the light.
If all reviewers did that then it just lets Hollywood homogeonize film even more.
if somethings bad, say it is, that may change things.
If its good then thats great, lets have more.
Jeez who would have thought what 10-15 years ago we would be in a place now full of Avengers, and X-men, more Batman, more Superman and on and on.
geek paradise.

I understand this movie is tracking even worse than the new Total Recall movie in the US market.
Sony better hope it does boffo International numbers otherwise they're looking at a Battleship-level turd on their hands.
Even putting aside the fact that Ted and Magic Mike are going to syphon some of it's domestic Box office shortly before Dark Knight and Ice Age 4 blow it way next week, it's been hilarious watching people like Harry falling over themselves try to convince an otherwise unconvinced market that this movie is even remotely worth the effort.
It's almost like the time when Industry "insiders" tried to convince us that Sam Worthington was an actual A-lister movie star, or that Taylor Kitsch was the next big thing.
Look for the inevitable Sony spin regarding how this is not a failure but just the first step to a great new franchise before they quietly put it to sleep and inevitably reboot it again in a couple of years.

thought those jackoffs were gone. Hadn't seen an obvious PR activity in the last couple threads. I thought maybe sony or the PR firm had realized they were alienating people. Guess not. Even more reason to want this movie to die.

The way in which you articulated it...this is the way I'd drunk text my friend about a movie after seeing it. I'm not accusing you being drunk or fucked up when you wrote it, I'm just saying...it's a wee bit all over the place. Either way, I'm looking forward to this, because it's statistically impossible for it to be worse than SM3. (No dude, that doesn't make any sense is what some of you are saying...especially considering opinions on a movie's quality are subjective). And I'm saying FUCK YOU PEOPLE. Spider-Man 3 was shit.

There are quite a few behind the scenes shenanigans that have been going on at Sony for many years now. They made this movie to keep the movie rights from going back to Marvel.
But lets not get lost in the weeds. I'll go with one problem. Just one. The silver dance shoes. Do they serve a purpose? Is there a reason they're silver? Does he really need to wear something so shiny? Does he jog at night? What is the deal with the Shoes?
They already changed the red and blue pattern on the suit. I guess they wanted to say, 'this is Spiderman, but not Raimi's Spiderman.' They made sure of that. But the shoes don't even look right. Its like he couldn't find his shoes and had to make do with first ones he could grab on his way out. Who okayed this design? Were they on crack?
What. Ever.

How the fuck can you sing praises about a film where (SPOILERS AHEAD):
1) The main character gets his powers by easily walking into a unguarded hi-tech room (which is supposed to be one of Oscorps biggest sources of revenue), ignoring the hazmat suits standing next to him (and warnings to wear them) and then fucking with with the spider machines so that all the spiders drop on him and yet no-one in the company is notified (not even a video camera). Is that how people would act? Is that how a billion dollar corporation would be run?
2) The hero build web-shooters with Oscorp property (the biocable cartridges). But they don't explain how he acquired such expensive property. Because if they did, they would have to show that he's a thief. You can't just say the cartridges magically landed in his lap! Either you show that Peter crossed a line by stealing, or come up with an honest explanation how he got them. But no, they ignore this issue because it's easier to edit over it than explain it.
3) Have Uncle Ben's death be marginalized. Remove the With Great Power comes Great Responsibility line and then have the prime motivator to be Spider Man to find the ass-hat with the tattoo that killed his uncle - which never gets resolved. And in fact ignoring other criminals who don't match the description (I people who are non-Caucasian don't have to be afraid of Spider-Man)? Is that what Spider Man was about? A man on a revenge tear? Wasn't it about a man driven by guilt and remorse for the death of a loved one that he could have prevented? Marc Webb seems to have forgotten that.
4) Have Dr. Connors refuse to use the (Lizard) regeneration formula on live human tests. Get fired and yet somehow Oscorp doesn't immediately escort him from the premises with security standing over him? So he can conveniently use the formula on himself? Not to mention Oscorps chief exec then decides to drive to a Brooklyn VA hospital himself (what no Manhattan VA hospitals) to personally test out the formula on patients. Not fearing risk or legal repercussions by doing such an action personally? Seriously, he never heard of delegating his authority to subordinates so that he is several steps removed from whatever illegal actions he is taking. No, this was all just a poor way to set up Spidey's first fight with The Lizard on the Williamsburg Bridge.
5) How does a one armed man build a secret laboratory in the NYC sewer? In a matter or hours, or perhaps days no less. Moving Men? Again a stupid plot hole with no explanation why or how something like that could exist?
6) Why does one of NY's leading police officers, Captain Stacy, ignore the radio call about the dangerous bio-terror weapon the Lizard is unleashing in lower Manhattan and continue to chase Spider-Man in his helicopter? It's already established by Stacy that Spider-Man is a Vigilante, not a threat. Seriously, would Cpt. Stacy have ignored 9/11 to chase after a speeder?
Explain how you can forgive these and so many other poorly written and blatantly obvious problems with the script. And let's not forget that a good chunk of this film was basically a set-up for sequels.
You know when Star Wars first came out Harry. Lucas didn't say, I'm going to include all this other unanswered shit in the film because I'm going to make 2 more sequels. The film starts and finishes on its own and if the series had ended with that film, it still would be a great story that wraps itself up. The Amazing Spider Man spends almost a third of the time trying to set itself up for a sequel and not actually focus on trying to tell a story in this film. Even the post credit scene is such a waste of time since all it does is try to say "Look we didn't answer all the questions! Stick around for a sequel!" Not to mention it was not a surprise because people saw that scene in the trailer.
I agree that Garfield and Stone are great as Peter and Gwen, but that does not excuse a shitty script with plot holes and poorly written supporting characters (who act stupidly). This film was a rush-job to keep the rights with Sony. I guess if you have a 9 year old mentality Harry, and think seeing Spider Man swing around in 3-D is cool, I can see why you liked this film. As an adult, I find this a waste of time, money and effort.

Harry at AICN says: "I thinks it's good, but almost amazing, but also incredible, but also kind of awesome, but just barely above totally sucking spider balls."
Here's a quote for the blu-ray for you:
"Almost as good as tying a cinderblock to your nuts and tossing it out the window!" -AICN talkbacker
Or, more honest:
"Look, we all know this sucks ass. But you need to buy this shit, or else Spidey wont be in the next Avengers, capiche?"

Yea, that will be somewhat bothersome to me too, but they did it in the original movie as well...oh well...
I guess it's worst here to me, because you can see where the costume was made to look sprayed red, with some black underneath. I figured for sure they'd show him making the costume. Oh well.

As I said I was looking forward to that scene...I actually brought up the Batman Begins example today. I
I was really expecting that they'd show him making the costume as well...I totally get you. It's a bit of a cop out, for sure.

I'm a golden age and silver age comic person, I never really got in to the Ultimate universe, I initially found it as confusing as hell and it felt like a cheap gimmick to help writers who had run out of idea's (which to some degree it was).
But the idea of screwing with the origin to that extent just annoys the hell out of me.
As for Andrew, he's a more realistic spidey bar the kooky costume but does he use the same voice as he does in the car jacker scene throughout the film, god that weasel type voice annoyed the hell out of me.
Its good they have return spidey to being young, Tobey never looked young to me, his face was always a spliff away from 30 (ringed eyes).
The disappointment for me are the fx, I loved the trailer where you are him in FPV getting about the city and landing on the mirrored building but all the high kicking green screen stuff looks old, the realistic spidey comic style poses and movement is nice but the presentation looks dated.
As for the Lizard, sorry, sy-fi will be wanting to hire the fx team, sorry he looks wrong, the texturing at times is cheap.
I still look forward to seeing the full film but I just hope a 2nd film will iron out the kinks.
As for Harry's gushing over the love angle, sigh, yes Peter can have a love life but it should not be the basis for the film, his faltering footsteps towards hooking up with Gwen should be there for some comedic effect and a ting portion of the story but not a ian part.
Sorry Harry, you are wrong here and by a long way. Spider-man, like most heroes hit the silver screen because we the fans want to see them do their stuff large as life, giving the Hulk a love life is just like ripping the character up, Spidey is no different, we as fans want the action, the poses, the humour, a small smattering of him having a life but first and foremost we want him battling the villains from the comics.
Love life is not a biggie for us...

Sorry about the awful spelling, I was having a full on battle with our bloody cat trying to sit in front of the monitor and on the keyboard.
I am now off to the local Chinese restaurant with a fresh offering for them.

The article and title were written at a high school level on purpose as a meta review for the movie itself.
So little effort was put into this review in order to mirror the effort put into the movie making process for the film!
Brilliant!

I wouldn't, surely all of the comments about his abysmal writing style would give him a complex. Obviously he doesn't read them or he would surely do something to improve.
Jesus Christ his reviews are hard work and I find myself thinking about other things while reading them, having to scroll back up when I realise I haven't took anything in for a while. Occasionally it doesn't make sense on the 2nd read through either. To be fair to him this one is much more coherent than most are. Maybe he IS trying to improve.

Looking at the illustrations does not qualify as "reading". That's what you did with this movie, isn't it? You looked at the pictures and you were too busy being "wowed" by them that you didn't really notice, nor care, that the basics of Spider-Man were screwed over.

In this sense, this is one of his better recent reviews. He didn't fall asleep. He didn't get all twisted over some mom who wouldn't shut her kid up. Is it sloppy writing? Always. But the difference between Harry's bad writing and, say Kidd's, is that Harry come to the table with passion and his voices comes through. Oh, and a bib. I imagine he comes to the table wearing a bib.

I've talked to many people who are not geeks or into comic books etc and they just don't get this reboot or think its not necessary. They all loved the Avengers and will go and see TDKR, they just don't want to see this reboot as like us fans, they see the need to and don't want to see his origin again, they just want a damn good spidey film. Most of them also said theyll just download it or get a pirate copy of someone if they do end up watching it.
Treating people like idiots isn't going to work and this film isnt going to make the money Sony are hoping for or expecting.
Since i've got enough points on my Odeon card to see a free film I'm going to see it tomorrow and will make my own mind up.

Just saying because thats been known in the past to inflate reviews.........!!!!!
This is 1 reboot too many. EU opening was only $50m last week (pretty poor figures from most major EU countries) Ice Age3 did much better @ $78m!!!
SM3 for example did something like $330m. Slight difference of MINUS $280M!!!

To see some of those negative reviews. Give your other gushingly positive reviews a little more credibility, yes?
And I think I'm not the only one long past believing that EVERY COMIC TITLE THAT EVER EXISTED WAS DEAR TO YOU AS A CHILD!!! I can believe you were into Spiderman, but I have a hard time recalling a title that you didn't recall a time when you squeezed it to your chest as you cried yourself to sleep as a child.

it would be Harry's childhood. His parents were in the movie memorabilia/comic book trade and he's known nothing else. He was lucky/savvy enough to capitalize on that as a young man so he's never HAD to know anything else.
Blessing or curse? You decide.

Harry gets plenty of hate for his overly positive reviews, but I rarely see people point out what a horrible grasp he has of grammar. Maybe it doesn't matter to some people, but it drives me fucking crazy!
"For me" is not a sentence. He seems mystified by commas, using them when he should use periods and periods where he should use commas. They are not interchangeable.
I don't mind his constant swearing because I get that's just his style. He's trying to express his passion, which admittedly seems to extend to just about everything he watches, but FOR FUCK'S SAKE, learn how to write a proper sentence!

is that, for all of it's flaws, Raimi's SPIDER-MAN 1 did the origin near flawlessly. Yes, the film faltered badly once it switched its focus to the Power Ranger Goblin. And it lost even more points when Koepp's uninspired script ripped off, of all films, Schumacher's BATMAN FOREVER("Choose!", "Hey, I recognize you from your kiss", etc.). But it did a great job with Uncle Ben, Aunt May, Peter's learning "great power coming from great responsibility", the burglar, etc. This film just screws around too much with the mythology, even though Garfield and Stone are fine. I'm looking forward to a sequel, but this movie just doesn't work as a whole.

of people who have no desire to see the origin done again. I'll be much more interested in part 2. Hopefully they go with a villain that hasn't been seen on the big screen yet, like Mysterio or Shocker.

that Lizard hasn't been on the big screen before. I meant thath I hope the sequels to Webb's movies don't reuse characters from past films like Green Goblin and Dr. Octopus. Spidey has such a great rogues gallery that you never need to do the same bad guy twice.

ha ha ha you absolute fucking cunt. You are calling me a plant just because i am laughing at your stupidity about boycotting this film.
I don't even know if this film is any good because i have not seen it yet. I am not a complete bellend like yourself tho who talks about boycotting a film, even tho he has not seen it yet, you absolute fucking idiot.
You are a complete fucking stupid scum cunt.
Idiots like yourself are deluded if you think you will make this film bomb by not seeing it.
I will watch it then make a decision, because i am not a fucking stupid fucking twat you fucking cunt fuck.

or should I say, Gwen from the comics...what does she have to do with Emma Stone's character, other than that she has a mildly similar look and she gets involved with Peter Parker? It's a big stretch to talk about how great it is to have "Gwen" on screen when really nothing going on here has much to do with any comics continuity. And to me, the most important thing about her is how she dies in the comics. And they can't do that in these new films, or they better not, for very obvious reasons. So what's the point? What's the real connection here? I think they only reason they went with Gwen instead of MJ is to avoid even more horrible connections with recent (and overall decent) movies that everyone remembers.
I don't see how any self-respecting comic fan can give this movie thumbs up, especially at the same time as pointing out its obvious problems. The whole Parker's parents backstory has always been desperate and irrelevant. With millions and millions of dollars behind these movies, millions of fans, and decades and decades of continuity and classic stories, there's really no excuse other than Hollywood ego and demographic cynicism to fuck up these franchises.

It's a small travesty that it actually won an Oscar.
Not a bad film, but not a great one either, by any stretch of the imagination.
I was hoping for a legitimate heartbreaking drama on the end of the Silent Film era. After all, it is called "The Artist."
Instead, I got a cute novelty film where a dog out-staged everything and everyone else.
Harvey Weinstein is really good at what he does.

If the "soul" of the character to you is her hair and some vague sense of "romance" then your "love" of the character is incomprehensibly shallow.
Once this movie decided to "Go There" and have Peter reveal his identity to Gwen, it surrenders all rights to be called remotely faithful.
Stupid review. Stupid support offered to a truly unworthy attempt to adapt Spider-Man.
You might as well title this article: "How Marc Webb Corrects the Stupidity of Stan Lee, Steve Ditko, and John Romita". This reversal of the core concepts of Parker and Stacy (and Captain Stacy) is way outside the realm of "interpretation". These characters are the OPPOSITE of what they should be. Parker isn't compulsively private, he reveals his identity. Gwen isn't afraid of Spider-Man, she loves Spider-Man. Capt. Stacy doesn't appreciate and like Spider-Man, he's obsessed with stopping Spider-Man. Those are OPPOSITES.
I'm sure Spider-Man appreciates the knife in the back, Harry. When self-professed "fans" of the character can "forgive" Hollywood's outright betrayal and destruction of the characters, the battle for a faithful adaptation is truly lost.
R.I.P. Spider-Man. You will soon be forgotten and replaced by Stepford Spider-Man.

"I could have gone for Alligators in the sewer, quasi worshipping him as he monologues about how the cold blooded dominance of Earth had been suppressed for 65 million years, but that a Reptilian Renaissance would lead to a new age of the Lizard."
Seriously? Personally, I think that would have come off as cheesy, campy & hoaky....sort of like the sewer resident Burton Penguin talking to penguins.
Speaking of Burton, I never thought that Joker was responsible for Batman. It didn't play out that way. The 1989 film had a preexisting Batman in effect causing the creation of the Joker.
I hated that with a passion and still do. It pisses me off when Hollywood uses that lazy way to somehow up the stakes for the protagonist. For me, it doesn't work. It just makes it less believable, as you said. That's why I'm likely to wait for Netflix to get the new Spidey film. I was already not really all that interested in the movie and when I heard that annoying line in the trailer, "I have to stop him, I created him" that was it. That eye-roll & cringe inducing line made up my mind for me. NOT INTERESTED. Why? WHY change that? Why can't Spidey (or any other hero) just fight some bad guy for the sake of fighting evil and protecting the innocent? Why do they think the audience needs that ridiculously contrived connection between them in order for us to enjoy it?
Hey, Hollywood....HINT: WE DON'T. Make these characters as they should be. Stop changing details that won't make ANY difference in the overall appreciation of the film (actually, less appreciation for myself and many others).

was not originally spoken by Uncle Ben. "With great power there must also come--great responsibility." was the conclusion Spidey came to at the end of Amazing Fantasy 15.
Your comment just goes to show that even the biggest fans have been shaped by the re-imagining that goes on in the comics as well as on the big screen. Sometimes we don't even know the source material as well as we would like to admit. At times the best we can hope for is for these movies to stay close to the spirit of the books and character.

Thank God someone else noticed this. Why does Spider-Man (who regularly web-swings through the city, landing on the sides on skyscrapers made of glass) need to have shiny steel-toed sandals on his shoes? Necessary suspension of disbelief aside, if Spidey were to actually web-sling into the side of a glass building wearing METAL sandals, the force of the impact of his steel-toe boots would shatter the glass of the buildings. The rest of the costume is a mess as well (why does he have a belt-stripe around his waist from the back, but not in the front, why are some of the fingers of his gloves blue and some red, etc), but the steel-toed sandals are inexcusable.

I noticed you've already started your "plant" cries again.
One thing I assume we can agree on is the purpose of a "plant". Their sole reason for existence being to get people to go see a specific movie, particularly one that the studio they work for feels is getting bad buzz.
So... why would a plant bother to take the time to insult you in an Ain't It Cool talkback? Regardless of how creatively they do so, how does that get anyone to go see a movie?
Why, as you so asininely said in another Spider-Man talkback you were trolling, would a plant attempt to "destroy honest discussion" on message boards? How does THAT get anyone's asses into a theater seat?
It does not. Plain and simple.
But you're more than welcome to keep yelling "plant" any time someone responds in the negative to your trolling. This is America, and you're free to do so. Just as I am free to continue calling you a dumb schmuck.
God bless America.

You wanted to write "It can be amazing" but you were so fucking amazed at something when you wrote that sentence that you missed the error.
I mean let's be serious, Harry- can you be amazing? If so, prove it :-)

Not because it's relevant as the movie is out and the jury is in, but because I (and probably most of us) WANT to see "mean" Harry.
You keep posting reviews of the movies you like and holding back the reviews of the movies you hate and yes, everyone will think you love them all and are thus useless as a critic.
Unleash hell once in a while...

idiots claiming it's amazing because "we love the comics more than you!" when actually the film sucks ass and isn't even that loyal to the comics anyway.
also hugo was indeed bullshit. can't believe the love for that crap. scorcese is teetering on the edge of lucas-spielberg-scott dementia.

Even though I haven't seen the film yet, one thing I know is that Toby McGuire played Parker as someone I can believe was geeky and had trouble with girls. Hard to believe that Garfield, with his "Twilight" hair-do, would have any problem attracting high-school cuties.

Seriously, it totally discredits anything you say. It makes your opinion appear either A) If positive, highly colored by nostalgia, or B) If negative, colored by your fondness of the original material. It would be like starting a review of a film with a highly critical assessment of the Director's personal life. Example: "Victor Salva is an absolutely despicable pedophile who has no business making films. That being said, 'Powder' was terrible!" Gee, really?

If you read the review (including the headline) out loud in drunken Arthur's voice (Dudley Moore, NOT Russell Brand), it becomes sublimely beautiful.
Any bit of the review will do for this little experiment, but in particular, the paragraphs starting with "WHAT? I wanted more romance?" and "My overall feeling..." work quite nicely.
Honk if you gave this a quiet little try at your desk.

that bs story that pops told about not knowing about spidey till 71 still makes me chuckle
its obvious that this movie is loosely based on the ultimate version
but they didnt have the balls to go all the way and use teen actors, or the entire plot line
so they mixed and matched
and ended up with a mess

.... Connors was human mutated into lizard.
So what your saying here is that the Sandman (bloke mutated into sand particles that can grow to 20 storeys tall..) or Venom (scary alien thingy-bob that mutates bloke into scary snaggle toothed alien thing) weren't full on monster villains?
Again, as per the inception comment, not with you there, H.

I mean Nolan kept raising the ante of weirdness and then suddenly he stuck in a bit from an old James Bond movie. Plus I just couldn't but the "collective unconsciousness bit" It just sailed in out of left field.

The fact us non-Spiderman fans only know Mary Jane sort of makes the emphasis on romance with Gwen Stacy seem pointless.
As for Spiderman edition wars, I thought the first SM was pretty crappy, loved the second one, and thought the third was alright. Didn't really get the hate that was ladled onto SM3, though I did think they tried to throw too much in.

the better. I have been a Spidey fan for most of my life, and in that time Spidey has been with Mary Jane. Why they thought anyone would want to sit through a Gwen Stacy co-starring movie is still a fucking mystery to me. The sooner she dies. The sooner we can get a new Mary Jane, and the romance will be worth a damn.

The Artist was bareable. I didn't really like any of them, but damn was Hugo terrible (other than the Melies directs scenes, it was second rate Dickens), and the Muppets was 5 hours of Jason Segal playing Jason Segal and Amy Adams playing Amy Adams with some scenes of Muppet circle jerk nostalgia. The Artist was at least slightly entertaining, but let's face it, the fricken dog is the only reason it won it's Oscar.

That's right...I had forgotten it, it was so bad and annoying....you're right, Harry...they go rid of Joe Chill and made Joker the guy who killed Bruce's parents. My brain had stuffed that factoid way back in the darkest recesses of my mind. Too bad it was brought forth again by this article. Damn you!! I thought myself rid of that irritation at long last! You! YOU!! You did it!! You brought it back, Harry!! I shall not rest until I have my revenge!! The world will bow to my will and I shall make you pay for what you've done!! HA, HA, HA, HA, HAAAAAhhhhh......!!!! AH!!! Uh....
(cough)(cough)....
Sorry. Got a little carried away there. I feel better now. (ahem)....You'll have to excuse me, Harry. Please proceed.

What's up with the tap dancing shoes Spidey's wearing in this?
Ridiculously silly.
Oh, well...thank God he's got mechanical webshooters this time. The webbing coming from his wrists that Cameron added was moronic. Made ZERO sense....if it were to be "realistic" it'd be coming out of a new glandular orifice just above his a$$.

Agreed. Below are my top ten examples of odd train-of-thought derailment in this review, or in some cases, NON train-of-thought. Enjoy. (of course, the Headline itself is honorary #1)
10.I needed THE LIZARD to pull a couple of jobs, headed towards his plan, the Midtown School incident just felt wrong to me. The action was wonderful, Stan Lee has an amazing featured scene.
9.We do not have the great SPIDER-MAN theme that none of us have yet heard, but all of us have wanted. I know that’s a small issue, but really… it isn’t.
8.Dennis does a great job with him, but he is definitely not a very sympathetic man in the film. He’s more Commissioner Gordon than anything. But be assured, it’s Captain Stacy through the film.
7. My overall feeling about THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN is that I genuinely like the movie, I absolutely love Peter, Ben, Aunt May, Gwen Stacy and Captain Stacy. When the movie is fully in those elements, it is shining and I’m smiling like a monkey. I also love the battles and encounters between THE LIZARD and SPIDER-MAN.
6.More alone time with THE LIZARD. I could have gone for Alligators in the sewer, quasi worshipping him as he monologues about how the cold blooded dominance of Earth had been suppressed for 65 million years, but that a Reptilian Renaissance would lead to a new age of the Lizard. Giving a scene like that to Randall Cook, would have resulted in a scene worthy of his Gollum fx legacy – we just were not given enough of it.
5.I know, that sounds like I didn’t enjoy it – I really did though – an awful lot. It’s a very emotional story if you know the story. BUT there’s a couple things holding me back from just unabashedly loving it. I’ve already talked about the plot issues. But James Horner… Dammit.
4. For me. That’s enough right there. If only to see one film that contains the soul of a character that I fell in love with. I loved Gwen Stacy.
3.WHAT? I wanted more romance? Yes, I do.
2.By no means is this film as problematic as SPIDER-MAN 3, by no means. The movie is actually more along the lines of SPIDER-MAN 2… just not that consistent. I’m not in the middle on this one.
1. Stop thinking in trilogy form. Make the world love her more than we ever have loved any Superhero Girlfriend. That’s the character. Make us dream of their old age together. This is such a great start. Teach a new generation what a great BF/GF film relationship is. Then show them how much love can hurt. It’d be amazing! I can be amazing. This is almost amazing..

For commenting so often on how much he loves this movie, Harry sure has a million changes he offers up in his review...
Yes, Harry: A Spider-Man movie with 4-5 seperate dinner scenes at the Stacys' house, a Lizard monologuing in the sewers to alligators when he isn't performing one of his multiple on-screen heists, more date scenes and a flash forward to Spidey and Gwen making oatmeal in their old-age...
That would be a terrific movie.

I really hate that they are doing another origin story. A lot. I dislike origin stories at the best of times as you spend too much time watching things you already know, something that we have seen recently is even worse.
BUT I do want to see the movie. I also want it to do well as I would like to see a sequel where they will hopefully move on and do something that we haven't already seen. I object to the price of the cinema anyway. To top it off, my son has just asked me if we can go to see it while I was writing this.
I wish they had followed SUPERMAN RETURNS' route and just started with the assumption that everyone already knows who Spiderman is, which they obviously do. I guess they thought since that movie bombed it would be too risky to follow that strategy.

They're too happy just to be alive ever day to hate on any movie. They love everything because every day they live in a gift so they fucking see every movie through rose colored glasses.
The near-dead or dying should not be allowed to review movies.

When I was 6 I LOVED the set of Marvel underwear I had. Adorning my crotch through the various days of the week were the likes of Thor, the Hulk, Iron Man and Thor- and even though Spiderman wasn't there on any of them you can rest assured that he was there.
Flash forward to now, and even though I dont have the underwear anymore I am constantly reminded of its brilliance when I watched the Amazing Spiderman movie. It's a love letter to all things geek, and a constant reminder of the set of underwear I have in my drawer since childhood.
I genuinely like the movie- it's a love letter to all things geek, and even though I love the movie there are things that I liked about it.
I loved Emma Peel as Gwen Stacey, the perfect foil for Tobey Garfields spiderman, the great character that loving adorned the underwear I had as a boy, and even though I dont have the underwear anymore it is a constant reminder to me that this is a love letter to all things geek.
Dennis is great as captain gordon, and even though he isn't like the captain gordon in the comics I read as a boy whilst wearing my marvel underwear, you can be sure that he is the captain Gordon of the movie based on the actual comics I read as a boy.
But I wanted more lizard! I love the fact that all of the lizards scenes were scored by James Horner, and had James been Danny Elfman we would have had the film scored by James Horner and not just the scenes where we see the Lizard!
In short, I was amazed at the movie, part 2 of a trilogy which begins at number 1 at the beginning where it should begin.
But if only I had that underwear......

Oh god, you got me crying with laughter.
Srsly, watch for my Top Ten lists - I usually do them in the DVD picks articles but some (like this one) are just so ripe and so low-hanging that I can't help but pluck at it.
Of course, Harry occasionally bans me for it, so they may disappear.
it mystifies me really, given some of the ugly personal insults some talkbackers get away with - I don't tend to do that; I just like to have fun with grammar.
Also, gotta love "WHAT? I wanted more romance? Yes, I do. You read those old comics and they were all about.... " The only way the tenses in that sentence grouping align is if Harry time travelled twice while writing it.

because they already played out the cartoon/happy ending Mary Jane version of Gwen's death in the first Raimi film. They can't do it again and have it end differently. Plus, I think Gwen's death only works in comics any way, where you have a story go on "forever" after it.

- July 4th has a long holiday this year
- People are curious about a new Spider-Man
- There is no other movies out this week
But in any way, shape or form does it mean that this is a good movie.
(But Sony doesn't care whether you like it or not, they just want you to see it.)
So be ready for TASM 2 & 3, maybe 4, then if ticket sales start falling, wait for a few years and you'll get another fucking reboot.
Don't bitch, you are asking for it.

Besides, what the hell do a bunch of 12 year olds know about what makes a good movie? Seriously you morons and your "holier than thou" opinions are a joke. As Marty's Grandfather said in Back to the Future, "their idiots, it comes from upbringing, they're parents are idiots too!" That describes you jerk-offs perfectly. It's your parents that are applauding the Obamatax oops I mean ObamaCare. Your all just too stupid to realize that in 2015 if you refuse to buy Health Insurance the Federal Gov't is going to tax you around 6 grand. So keep applauding morons..keep dogging Harry's reviews and keep coming back to his website day after day. Thank God for a REAL Spidey movie and Thank God for Romney's election in November. No more M.J. before Gwen...No more Commies in the White House.

*So... why would a plant bother to take the time to insult you in an Ain't It Cool talkback? Regardless of how creatively they do so, how does that get anyone to go see a movie?
Why, as you so asininely said in another Spider-Man talkback you were trolling, would a plant attempt to "destroy honest discussion" on message boards? How does THAT get anyone's asses into a theater seat?*
You know why you do it. To try to make critics look like whiners and squash dissent. Negative criticism has just as much impact on word of mouth as positive.

I bought the soundtrack on iTunes earlier and I thought it was fantastic. Obviously I've not heard the score in the context if the film, but on it's own it's sweeping, dramatic and action packed and it has probably made me want to see the film more than any trailer has managed so far.
Unless you count Superman Returns (whose score succeeded mostly because it reused John Williams great theme), I think this is one of the best superhero scores since Elfman did Batman.

*ha ha ha you absolute fucking cunt. You are calling me a plant just because i am laughing at your stupidity about boycotting this film.
I don't even know if this film is any good because i have not seen it yet. I am not a complete bellend like yourself tho who talks about boycotting a film, even tho he has not seen it yet, you absolute fucking idiot.
You are a complete fucking stupid scum cunt.
Idiots like yourself are deluded if you think you will make this film bomb by not seeing it.
I will watch it then make a decision, because i am not a fucking stupid fucking twat you fucking cunt fuck.*
Lol. Sure. You're not a plant. Just someone who feels very strongly about a movie he hasn't seen and doesn't even know if its good. So strongly that anybody who doesn't want to see it is a fucking cunt fuck. Riiiiight.

"Had the film focused on Parker discovering and mastering his new self, beginning his relationship with Gwen, his lesson, the emergence of Spider-Man, Curt Connors’ involvement with Peter, his transformation, Police hunting both, and the end of the story – it’d been spectacular. They would’ve had more room for Peter & Gwen & her family, more room for THE LIZARD and just less unnecessary BS."
First, isn't that what the plot of the movie is? Did you fall asleep during those parts? Second, since you say it doesn't focus on those things, you're saying had the film had a cohesive story, building characters and creating a universe we can inhabit, it would have been a better film, but because you have to love it you can look past that the story was crap and still love it?
I'm very confused.

"Negative criticism has just as much impact on word of mouth as positive."
Possibly, but it doesn't get the asses in the theater seats. Which, as we've already determined, is the only reason "plants" exist.
Best get back under your bridge, I hear some bill goats coming.
You lost today, kid. But it doesn't mean you have to like it.

The time has come...
<P>
"The Elements of Style" by William Strunk, Jr.
<P>
Asserting that one must first know the rules to break them, this classic reference book is a must-have for any student and conscientious writer. Intended for use in which the practice of composition is combined with the study of literature, it gives in brief space the principal requirements of plain English style and concentrates attention on the rules of usage and principles of composition most commonly violated.
<P>
http://www.bartleby.com/141/

*Possibly, but it doesn't get the asses in the theater seats. Which, as we've already determined, is the only reason "plants" exist. *
You're deliberately obtuse, plant. Negative criticism keeps people out of the theater. Thus the imperative for attack plants, such as yourself. The fact that you insist on denying the existence of such people just demonstrates that you are one of them.

Why would they call it this...did they want people to think its more like the original comic book than Sam Raimi's version? Or did they just want to be different and stand out? Either way, im over the whole thing. Never read any of the comics growing up, so I literally feel nothing for this franchise. I try to be interested, but it all just feels so forced. You must love the amazing spider man! because its amazing! Look...a man that can shoot webs from his wrists, and he swings...and he fights people, and things! Enough with the generic comic book films...I want something different, something that will suprise me. There is absolutely nothing amazing about SpiderMan!

I don't know about bod33, but slone's been posting on this site for years. He used to hang out in the LOST talkbacks alot. It's highly unlikely he's a plant. And just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they are.

Knowles thought Prometheus was great...that says it all...gone are the days when he was honest..now I just feel that he bows to the studios, which he initially never used to.... end of. Explain that Harry...

..... NO MORE DAREDEVIL please!!! Affleck fucked that one up so much it is part of my ongoing mission to seek out every copy and ritualistically burn the fuckers!
I remember a while back I was sent an e-mail from total film mag saying if I subscribed I could have the extended edition of daredevil for free. I emailed back and said If I subscribed, could they fucking keep it??

If they're as entertaining as the one in this TB then that's something to look forward to.
I have re-read the review and it actually makes less sense the MORE you read it. I have the thing saved to my favourites as it is a fucking corker!!!
There was only one I can think of that was as incoherent, and it was from merrick (top guy, actually!!!) who wasn't feeling well and posted a fucking doozy that went all over the place. Had me laughing for a fucking week. Wish I could find the thing- it was awesome stuff!!

You box-office soothsayers predicting doom and gloom for this movie may yet have your day in the sun, but if you're going to jump the gun on your "Spidey failed at the global box-office" announcements, at least get your facts straight; the $50.2 million was from SOME ASIAN markets (where it reportedly broke records) and GERMANY. There was almost no overlap between TASM and Madagascar 3 last weekend. You're free to verify this at both boxofficemojo.com and boxofficeguru.com.
I thought it was better than the first and third Raimi movies. Or does anyone want to compare Rhys Ifan's Lizard to the Power Ranger Green Goblin and that ridiculous rooftop conversation a drugged Spidey had with him?
The only thing the first movie had over it was the death of Uncle Ben; they kind of dropped the ball on that here, and yes, it does hurt the narrative a bit. I also have to agree with Harry on how irritating the Oscorp crap is. In many other respects, however, they manage to improve on the original product, especially with the Peter/Gwen relationship. I'll spare you guys a review but I honestly found this movie worth seeing. And the 3-D was really good.
Was it as good as SM2? Nah. Not even close, but it works on a lot of levels.
Frankly, I want this movie to succeed not because I'm particularly rooting for it but because I want all of these self-anointed box-office prophets to be exposed for the ignoramuses they really are; you know, the guys who said that The Avengers wouldn't make more than $320 million or so in the U.S....

You box-office soothsayers predicting doom and gloom for this movie may yet have your day in the sun, but if you're going to jump the gun on your "Spidey failed at the global box-office" announcements, at least get your facts straight; the $50.2 million was from SOME ASIAN markets (where it reportedly broke records) and GERMANY. There was almost no overlap between TASM and Madagascar 3 last weekend. You're free to verify this at both boxofficemojo.com and boxofficeguru.com.
I thought it was better than the first and third Raimi movies. Or does anyone want to compare Rhys Ifan's Lizard to the Power Ranger Green Goblin and that ridiculous rooftop conversation a drugged Spidey had with him?
The only thing the first movie had over it was the death of Uncle Ben; they kind of dropped the ball on that here, and yes, it does hurt the narrative a bit. I also have to agree with Harry on how irritating the Oscorp crap is. In many other respects, however, they manage to improve on the original product, especially with the Peter/Gwen relationship. I'll spare you guys a review but I honestly found this movie worth seeing. And the 3-D was really good.
Was it as good as SM2? Nah. Not even close, but it works on a lot of levels.
Frankly, I want this movie to succeed not because I'm particularly rooting for it but because I want all of these self-anointed box-office prophets to be exposed for the ignoramuses they really are; you know, the guys who said that The Avengers wouldn't make more than $320 million or so in the U.S....

You box-office soothsayers predicting doom and gloom for this movie may yet have your day in the sun, but if you're going to jump the gun on your "Spidey failed at the global box-office" announcements, at least get your facts straight; the $50.2 million was from SOME ASIAN markets (where it reportedly broke records) and GERMANY. There was almost no overlap between TASM and Madagascar 3 last weekend. You're free to verify this at both boxofficemojo.com and boxofficeguru.com.
I thought it was better than the first and third Raimi movies. Or does anyone want to compare Rhys Ifan's Lizard to the Power Ranger Green Goblin and that ridiculous rooftop conversation a drugged Spidey had with him?
The only thing the first movie had over it was the death of Uncle Ben; they kind of dropped the ball on that here, and yes, it does hurt the narrative a bit. I also have to agree with Harry on how irritating the Oscorp crap is. In many other respects, however, they manage to improve on the original product, especially with the Peter/Gwen relationship. I'll spare you guys a review but I honestly found this movie worth seeing. And the 3-D was really good.
Was it as good as SM2? Nah. Not even close, but it works on a lot of levels.
Frankly, I want this movie to succeed not because I'm particularly rooting for it but because I want all of these self-anointed box-office prophets to be exposed for the ignoramuses they really are; you know, the guys who said that The Avengers wouldn't make more than $320 million or so in the U.S....

... he has watched the three amigos far too often!!!
"Spiderman loves on top of buildings, flinging his webs across Gwen Stacey and her father on the bridge whilst dangling a pair of knee high boots- I LOVE THAT! The feeling I have when stop because of the love trialngle if the lizard could communicate and looks like silly string flying from his wrists!
Seriously, this team of film makers have fortunate they're not Raimi for added expense. His vision for 4 and all the origins or being involved in his parents’ disappearance.
That being said, I REALLY did an awful lot!"
Now, what the FUCK was wrong with that, eh???

... he has watched the three amigos far too often!!!
"Spiderman loves on top of buildings, flinging his webs across Gwen Stacey and her father on the bridge whilst dangling a pair of knee high boots- I LOVE THAT! The feeling I have when stop because of the love trialngle if the lizard could communicate and looks like silly string flying from his wrists!
Seriously, this team of film makers have fortunate they're not Raimi for added expense. His vision for 4 and all the origins or being involved in his parents’ disappearance.
That being said, I REALLY did an awful lot!"
Now, what the FUCK was wrong with that, eh???

battleship and john carter did boffo numbers
only thing that means shit is buzz....THERE IS NONE
great numbers and silent as a lamb on all the boards
with avengers, there were great numbers and huge buzz
and please, cease the close to studio plant revisionist talk
thank you
tell me one thing...how did spidey get the web formula?

.... POTC 4 did a truck load of non US money, as did Ice Age 3.
So much so that now bigger releases are getting the overseas releases ahead of the US- (avengers, prometheus, ice age 4, spiderman)
That NEVER used to happen a few years ago with US almost always kicking off first and the rest catching up a few weeks later.
It is ALL about the money. Spidey could turn out to be a big bag of shit, but it will take a truckload of cash and has already had a sequel greenlit.

Or maybe it might be ticket prices. I'm not sure how much it costs to see a movie in Europe or Asia, but maybe their ticket prices are higher and that might account for movies doing well over seas.
I saw Prometheus today finally and debated on whether or not to return for the midnight showing of The Amazing Retain the Rights-Man. I don't think I will. I'll probably just wait for the DVD. When Disney buys the rights back and makes a decent looking film then I might go see Spider-Man in the theater. This just doesn't look like fun to me. Spider-Man is not the character to go dark and brooding with. And honestly, that clip of him assaulting the car thief really turned me off. Spider-Man doesn't come off as Spider-Man sarcastic, instead he seems more Deadpool sarcastic... Just a mouthy smart ass dick.

Was lucky enough to go to two previews of this. Unfortunately, all problems I had the first time were still present. Why the fuck did they include
'Indian exposition guy'? The unresolved plot elements really annoy me and, eventually, the film feels like two separate films cobbled together. My full take
http://thecrat.com/movie-reviews/the-amazing-spider-man-review-by-adam/

I would pay just for the hair pulling frustration & wide-eyed horror oozing from so many of these comments.
Spinal Tap has somehow infected Harry's writing. I can think of no other reasonable explanation for the brutality we are seeing visited upon the English language. Reading Harry is like watching cellphone footage of a racist cop who tasers English for no good reason and then bends over to pistol whip its prone body for a good ten minutes. And I love it...

...is HIGHLY debatable. Just as the producers of "Pirate of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides."
But that wasnt the point. The point was that someone (can't find the post, but I know it's here somewhere) was saying that B.O. numbers in EUROPE were poor, when in fact it's only opened in GERMANY and select Asian markets, which, don't really mean much to overall B.O. The POINT was that this person was jumping up and down with apparent glee that TASM had failed to light up the box-office in a region where, by and large, it hasn't even OPENED yet.
If and when this movie flops conclusively, then do your dances of joy. Till then, why not wait till the full numbers come out? Posting hastily without even checking where the numbers were reached makes you look even more pathetic than the supposed plants you guys love to rake over hot coals.

It strikes me that he has too many problems with it to really love it, so I don't get how, at the end of it all, he can claim to like it as much as he says he does. His best reviews are the ones in which he goes all out in professing his love for a movie or unequivocally shits on it (as he has done, to be perfectly fair, from time to time). This review feels neither here nor there, like Harry walked into the movie wanting to write a glowing review but couldn't do it after watching it, yet he couldn't totally abandon his inclination to root for this film. No offense Harry, but this isn't one of your better reviews. As disturbing as your revelation that you cried while peeing in a urinal during a screening of the first SM movie was, at least the review that contained that little vignette was more coherently written.

Then I'll be back to give you all my review. Interesting thoughts, Harry. Specifically the lack of a spiderman hero theme, and changing the 'with great power' line.
still I don't think that shit will bother me that much. If this movie doesn't have no fucking macy gray, no fucking mute spiderman, no fucking complete disregard for spiderman's greatness in general... I'll love it...
be back yall.

If they don't keep the angst, guilt, and responsibility in Spider-Man then they will have truly ruined the character. Have you seen Dan Slott's current writer run in the comic? Things have become very very cushy for Peter. On the one hand it feels good to see a character that's suffered most of my life finally achieve a fulfilling life, but its ruining the character. In a few years readers and the writers will have forgotten the character's motivation.

ticket prices are lower overseas than in the states
spidey broke records in india...opened at 2mil....thats a good opening for a theater in hollywood
movies are now opening overseas to stem the hurt of piracy
see, despite the screaming and yelling the suits have done...they know that piracy doesnt hurt the bottom line in america...we watch pirated movies and still go to the theater...cuz we is sheep...but it does hurt sales in overseas markets
also, they dont have to worry about piracy in asian markets, where penalties are stiff...asia works for hollywood
note, nothing is opening early in russia anymore...those guys are the pirate kings
additionally, there are elements at both fox and sony that hate this genre.they like the money, but hate the genre and believe that they can throw out any pos and the fans will buy it. and as a result, they hate that they have been forced to make quality films that also pay respect to the genre.
forget what harry says....this is a spidey movie for those that hate the genre.
everything that avengers represents...that finally the world really does embrace geek culture....we get this?

For offering us a pointless reboot of a series that's only a few years old.
For completely fucking up a character that is loved by millions, from his motivations moral code and relationships, right down to his costume.
For using deceptive marketing tactics to ridicule anyone who has a problem with this movie.
If you geeks have any self respect you'll boycott this movie.
Otherwise they won't learn nothin.

I never once denied the existence of plants. I said I don't believe they're wasting their time in talkbacks picking fights and insulting people. Huge difference.
But I tire of this meaningless exchange. Just type 'slone13' into the little search box at the top of the page and let me know what you come up with. You'll find hundreds of posts going back years. I was posting on this site when you were still sucking on your momma's tit.
I haven't seen the new Spider-man yet. And at no point did I ever say I thought it was going to be any good. I'll probably see it this weekend. From what I've read it sounds as if I'll like it less than all three of Raimi's.
At the moment, the only flick I'm really psyched to see is Looper.

*I never once denied the existence of plants. I said I don't believe they're wasting their time in talkbacks picking fights and insulting people. Huge difference. *
That's what plants do.
*But I tire of this meaningless exchange. Just type 'slone13' into the little search box at the top of the page and let me know what you come up with. You'll find hundreds of posts going back years. I was posting on this site when you were still sucking on your momma's tit.*
I don't really care about that. When you're spewing such blatant disinfo you must have an ulterior motive. Probably been marketing on this site for other movies as well.
BTW chilled feline solution is me. My other login wasn't working earlier for some reason.

Webb really nailed Spidey here. Hope Disney works out a deal to get Garfield's Parker in the Avengers somehow, because they don't need to reboot this again.
Bob, please don't drop the ball with the sequel, because I haven't been this pumped for a franchise in years.

And if tracking is correct (who knows) and this thing really does have sub-Total Recall interest, the subsequent copy might be just as fun to read.
Mainstream movies are shite, and they need an overhaul in every department. A friend of mine runs baseball for a huge US equipment distributor, and he deals with the costume department for various shows. He'll sell them forty jerseys at $350 bucks a pop, when just that morning he gave a university the exact same order for (literally) a tenth of the price.
They just piss money away, everywhere and on everything, and naturally you become as interesting as an entitled fat kid who's never had to answer for his opinions.

And I just want to say - saw i and LOVED IT. Sure, I liked the Sammy Rammy films, except number three which is why we sacked him, and I was a little unsure about this new version let me ASSURE YOU OF THAT. But after one minute it was obvious they totally nailed everything about Captain Spiderman and it's AWSOME. Trust me, even though you've never seen my user ID and never will again, even my girlfriend loved it so you should totally take your partner if you have one. Oh and also my work colleagues came and they LOVED IT TOO, so why not treat ll of them to a ticket? And I forgot to mention - I found fifty bucks on the way home - I'm not saying it's connected but YOU NEVER KNOW LOL!! Go see, it's great, i'm off to imdb to give it 10/10 and write a similar totally believable non-plant review there too. Seeya!!

I'm no fan of Raimi's trilogy, nor do I feel sorry he was ousted. Also, I'm not gonna complain about this being a reboot, because a reboot was needed after the mess that Sam made. And lol for anyone hating on a studio for getting a film out to avoid letting a profitable license lapse. Compared to some of Marvel's offerings I doubt they could've done much better than what Webb gave us.

How can you walk away from this film and not be moved? How can anyone say they hated it?
It's emotionally heavy and real. You could feel everyone fighting back tears and crying in the theater.
If you weren't crying or holding back tears, especially in the final 15 minutes, then please kill yourself because you are a worthless piece of shit.
As to comparisons to Sam Raimi's trilogy: Why compare? All the Spidey films are phenomenal.
Raimi's Spiderman was like a golden age tale. It's what an awesome film based on Spider-Man would be in The Amazing Spider-Man's world.
Webb's Spiderman is the more adult, more gritty world.
The similarities to the difference between Tim Burton's Batman and Christopher Nolan's Batman would be fair, but no where near the opposite ends of the spectrum that those two imaginings are.
The major aspect this film nailed is the most important: Characters with genuine emotion. The characters were smart. They were real. I felt what they felt and it hurt. It moved me. It moved everyone.
I'm really appreciative that they made this film. It's so great, that I worry about a sequel ruining it. It's so well done, I hope that the same creative team make all the sequels this vision holds. That's the same way I felt about Raimi's.
We live in a cinematic heaven right now, there is no doubt.

Quite obviously a plant from a studio other than SONY. It's embarrassing and shameless. Demanding a boycott, multiple logins, hanging out only in Spider-Man message boards=PLANT. If it looks like a plant, smells like a plant, and spends an unhealthy and obsessive amount of time denouncing a film for no good reason, it's a plant.

Most plants I've ever seen on this site re one movie, and all really fucking obvious. Could tell them why, but why make their job easier? Perhaps if this site had a function like every other site where you can check a poster's history it might make it easier to check... even though it's not difficult to tell at all anyway. It's having the opposite effect anyway, making everyone realise Sony are panicking about this shit they have to sell and putting everyone else off from going to see it.

Yes, I realize it's silly to take a rooting interest in the box office success of a major Hollywood release, but I decided to indulge myself anyway and root against this truly unnecessary film.
It would have been nice to see it fail spectacularly to the ruin of everyone involved, but the overseas and the tracking say that won't happen. Oh well.

I'm going to boycott (cos I think it'll suck as much as anything) and yes, it looks like it will make enough for a sequel... probably. But maybe just one? Which will maybe suck even more and then that's the end. The reboot series looks like a failure and we wait a bit longer and maybe they'll get it right or Marvel get the rights. They probably could've made a movie ten times worse and it would still have been a hit because its Spider-Man.

Reboot - and get it right this time, with Betty Brant and her dodgy brother's problems with Doc Ock. No more of this "Gwen Stacy is the highly-intellectual Dr. Christmas Jones"-sounding balls. She's a hot 1960s bimbo in go-go boots. Oh, and she's a slut, too, for fucking Norman Osbourne behind Peter's back. Fuck her in her broken neck.

It's just a shame he decided to "develop" characters who bear no resemblance to the actual characters from the comics.
Oh, I forgot. He's a movie director, so he knows better than the people who created them in the first place.

I'm the one that hates religion and deems it the root of all evil. It's the reason you are being a little bitch about a movie you haven't even seen yet. Not that it will make a difference, because you hate everything. You hate your life. Because you know deep down inside, that its all fake, you built your world around lies.
And I admit, my post really does read like a plant. I fully admit that. I read it and think, "What the fuck?" You know why it reads like a plant? Because I have nothing but great things to say about this movie. Where the fuck is everyone? Why do people feel they must sleep at designated times deemed appropriate by society? It makes more sense to sleep during the day to avoid the hot as fuck heat. It's cooler at night. You also have less nagging people (in the non-internet world). If only people didn't submit to robotic jobs that are expected of them by their overbearing religious parents, maybe they would live a little outside the box of the bible.
I saw the midnight IMAX 3D showing. It fucking ruled. I don't expect a lot of people to admit they loved this film because its an emotional one. People don't like to admit or show their emotions because they're religious dad that coaches Little League would beat the fuck out of them after putting his wife in her place for not following the rules.
It also takes intelligence to appreciate these films.
Ever notice how when a film is "dark" people can't seem to take it. It's as if religion has taught them in their upbringing, that movies should always be happy with happy endings where the hero always get the girl and they get married and do spins while holding hands. Hahahaha. Isn't life grand? Haha.
Fuck you.
I'm not a plant.
Your mother sucks cocks in a non-existent hell.
Would a plant say that?
This movie better than you.
Please go see it and report back your true feelings. If you seriously weren't moved by it, you are a liar or an unfeeling piece of shit.

It's just there's a lot about, and you admit your review reads planty, so sorry and suck my dick. And no I won't go to see it and report back, because it seems to be a pile of shit, despite your glowing review. I'm sure I'll see it one day, that'll do for me. Anyone vouch for seeing the name xen11 before btw?

I wanted The Amazing Spider-Man to fail because I love Raimi's trilogy. Though I was satisfied with 3 being the last and actually thought it should end there. That was my immediate thought after seeing Spider-Man 3 for the first time. 3 is a beautiful film that ends the story appropriately. Though I definitely would have loved to see another film with that team again and still would like to see it. But I'm fully satisfied with Raimi's trilogy and its better than making another one that may just feel like they are retreading the same story (which, if that revealed outline is true, would have).
I'd rather see a reboot than a bad sequel that ruins what came before. This way, Raimi's trilogy remains a closed story with no recasting or new directors to fuck things up. The story is told. Let's see a new one, a new universe.
And I thought it was too soon. I was wrong. It's never too soon. Why wait? I'm intelligent enough to tell the difference between two universes.
The Amazing Spider-Man is very well done and proved my past-self wrong. Sony hit it out of the park again. I know that may seem "plant-ish" to say, but its true.
I'm not even sure why I post here. Maybe its just to write feelings. Maybe its because I love talking about the thing I'm passionate about. Probably because I can say whatever I want on AICN without being censored (unless I talk about Nordling in Nordling's thread. So I try to avoid that fuckface. I got a lot of history deleted because he banned me for calling him out on not putting a spoiler in a headline that screamed a spoiler for Prometheus. I somehow rose from the dead. Got like half of my history back. Some great discussions lost forever though.)
It's an interesting study in humanity to read a lot of the shit on this site though. So much hate. Even for this movie. I haven't read one positive or totally positive review for The Amazing Spider-Man on AICN. (So please stop calling Harry and Co. sell-outs. They advertise for a film in the banners because its fucking SPIDER-MAN on a movie comics geek site, they'd be stupid not to.) They seem to not be defending this film for some reason.
And that's the amusing thing, is to read all this hate from all the writers (editors and talkbackers) on this site. This a great fucking movie and most people, so far, do not seem to appreciate it. It blows my mind how much hate beautiful things get, but if I mention something that is destroying the world (like religion) it immediately gets defended or hushed. "You're a crazy cook, Xen11, for mentioning religion and politics in seemingly every talkback." I do it because it really is the root of everything, isn't it? It's what shapes the mind of an individual. I feel that liberal movies are the opposing force to conservative religion. Movies have imagination and freedom, they take you to a different universe where anything can happen and expression is key. Religion wants you to bow and obey, in other words, "Fuck your imagination, you must destroy and sacrifice because otherwise you will be burned forever", in other other words, "Do what I say and I won't kill you. Allah/God is Great. Tom Cruise is crazy but we're not."
My point is that most of you believe and live by this thing called religion and are encouraged to hate everything that reveals some sort of truth, because, "Truth is the Devil." A great movie speaks the truth in imaginative ways. It shines a light on all the fallacies of society. They explore the depths of human emotion and imagination. Religion seeks to destroy emotion and imagination.
You also have bad movies like "Battle: L.A." which are made in conjunction with real soldiers (you know, those people that work for those people that are family and run by those other people who own the churches. If you don't have intelligence, you may not see these connections. You might even be a part of it.) Battle: L.A. was a recruitment video for people who want to shoot shit because God is good and anyone not of our conservative religious way is considered evil and must die. (You know, those evil people that we call crazy for worshipping an imaginary being that promises them a bunch of virgins when they die. "That's crazy compared to our everlasting heaven in God's kingdom of gold.")
So keep on hating while I keep on loving and appreciating what these artists have to offer. These movies force you to think and feel. You have no intellect to access those abilities because you are a drone that was built to hate.

Not saying that Garfield was a little wooden boy like Christensen (or god forbid, Jake Lloyd) but i kept getting this whiney vibe that permeated the entire performance. He emotes well. That's fine. I didn't go to this movie for emotional content. I want SPIDER MAN. The action scenes were too frentic and had me grasping for a remote to rewind and slomo. There was no economical storytelling here. They pushed everything onscreen and left it to you to sort it all out. My caffeine soaked brain couldn't process what i was seeing at 12:01.

Hayden had this kind of whiny, bratty, douchey kid thing going on that I disliked even apart from his wooden acting.
If PP has even an iota of something similar going on, I think I'm out. And I think Garfield is a fine actor. I really liked him in Red Riding.

What? You mean the no account one off long over due but everyone dreading it cross-universe story where Spider-Man 616 visits the Ultimate verse (something that wasn't supposed to happen but somehow keeps managing to happen for little one off stories) and immediately bumps into Miles-Spider-Man? Or the quickly forgotten Spider-girls?

Peter has a big heart and a cheery disposition. Bad things happen to him, but those bad things do not define him.
Peter and the overall tone of this new film are just far too grim. And ultimately, grim, angsty, angry, surly are not the core ingredients of Spider-Man.

The guy directed 1 movie.
Just one.
And one that gave no indication that he could handle a big budget action flick.
I'm convinced he got the gig solely based on his last name: Webb.
And it's getting worse. Two guys who direct a sit com are hired to direct the next Captain America.
They are just giving these director jobs away these days.
How many more comic book characters are they going to let the Crank guys ruin?
Rant over.

*it would be unlikely I'd remember way back (1998?) when Moriarty got loads of shit for condemning illegal downloading after admitting he'd done the same, right? Need any more examples of my time here?
Exactly what a plant would say. As I sad, if it looks like a plant, smells like a plant, and spends an unhealthy and obsessive amount of time denouncing a film for no good reason, it's a plant.

Couldn't get in 500 Days However, I would be curious of how AICN's TB #1 fan of said Movie (BSB, any comments?) review of ASM.
I'm gonna forgo seeing this and wait for the more anticipated Dark Knight Rises instead.
been hearing not too many good buzz about this film that swayed me from seeing it in the theaters.

1) they mess with ditko's design... AND SILVER TOE SHOES!!!! Come on!
2) they mess with uncle Ben dying
3) great power and responsibility are never uttered in the movie
4) over 1 hour of origin story that never should have been done ( too soon... too many people still remember the first 3 )
5) plot holes the size of trucks! Doc Connors sets up a lab in the swears like lex Luther in superman the movie... 1 day after he is fired! With only one arm! I can barely move a table to the next room... and I have two hands. HECK, I'm getting tired typing. :)
6) oh yeah... More than Peter Parker knows Peter Parker is spiderman! ( what's the point of the mask... why not just swing around without it? )
7) too many times he takes off his mask when it wasn't nessessary.
8) Peter is no longer driven by guilt... Now he is driven by revenge! ( like Batman? )
9) captain Stacey ignores a chemical terrorist threat to hunt down a vigilante spiderman!!??? WOW!!!
10) 90% of the shots in the trailers are from the third act! You already know the ending! Including the after credits scene! HOLEY fuck! This is right up there with the desperation of the John carter movie! "see this awesome movie for these awesome shots!" all of which is the ending!
11) this movie is JUST as WORSE as spiderman 3... At least spidey3 had a credible story... This movie is a patch work of scenes put together to get you to the action...
12) oh yeah... Peter is able to sneak into the most heavily guarded lab and ignore the hasmat warnings to go play with dangerous SPIDERS... Not one spider... But MANY spiders!
13) Lizard looks like the RATTLER from the newspaper Spider-Man Comics... and the Lizard doesn't slurr "HISSSSSS" words!
God damn it... These Producers/Writers & Director get paid a lot of money and they can't even put together a good story ( like Spider-Man 1 and 2 ) ... It's like they never left preliminary draft one script... They just went right to production.
This is a dark/twilight riff... Where's the fun!!? Spider-Man is supposed to be Marvel's flagship character of FUN!!!
BUT...
WHAT I LOVED ABOUT IT:
Stan Lee's scene... just beautiful.
Emma as Gwen... nice.
Web-Shooters... VERY nice.

I can get here on my bike. Lots of fucking kids. So annoying...
From the packed as shit theaters for this movie i think its going to be massive successwise and deservedly so... i neaerly cried at points. What a great film. A love letter to spiderman and not the mockery that was the last trilogy. The best thing about it is how it puts you in spideys shoes and you feel his pain, something a lot ofthese movies tend to misss in pursuit of more cgi bullshit. Thats the true triumph that a film made today is so involving...
I am going to put it on par with xmen2, batman, ang lees hulk, hellboy and ninja turtles. Fuck yeah
This is one of the best comic book movies ever made.
No great power line.. fuck...
...
Oh wellwhen spidey said, im spiderman some guy yelled YEAH..
I love this fucking movie

In the original comic (Amazing Fantasy) Uncle Ben never said the line about "Great power...". That was in the narrator box.
So, um, maybe rethink your Shakespeare reference?
Also, rethink your fan cred.
Real Spidey fans know this. And we love the movie.

I was just relieved that Macy Gray wasnt singing in a parade or that there wasnt a bunch of annoying New Yorkers saying " You mess with Spiderman you mess with New Yawk!". Seriously Spiderman 1 was so fucking cheesy. Not to mention the ridiculous over acting of Willam Dafoe. Raimi ruined the first movie. IF Spiderman 2 wasnt so good then we'd be thinking of the whole Raimi trilogy like Shoemakers Batman crap. Then we go to Spiderman 3 and they had 2 full singing and dancing numbers. Not to mention the shit storm that was Emo Parker. Oh and lets not forget the anorexic ugly chick next door. You can bitch all you want about them rebooting it and starting over too close to the end of the first trilogy but the fact is besides Sipidey 2 Raimi didnt do it justice.

And let's cut to the chase. Harry has never fucked or even gotten close to fucking anywhere near as hot as Gwen Stacy; in any of her incarnations.
Most of you bottom-dwellers probably think Yoko is attractive. She isn't. She's a fucked up loser who is going to toss Knowles aside as soon as the opportunity arises.
admit your weaknesses Knowles! which is your movie knowledge is shit.
peace

I find that very suspect. Of the reviewers here - even the ones that gave this film an overall *good* review - every single one of them says the big problems are:
1) The origin story all over again was unnecessary
2) Most of the film's story feels rushed and/or forced
Uh, so every one of them but Harry says the story is forced and feels rushed. Hmm, who should I believe? Gee, I wonder...

Because Raimi fucked up 2 of the 3 movies. Nobody was interested in seeing Raimi do a 4th movie after the cluster fuck of "Spider-Man" 3. NOBODY!!!
ASM is second only to "Spider-Man" 2. Since they started out on such a high note I am sure the follow up will be that much better. By making us care about Peter and not just "Spider-Man" Marc Webb has given the movie a heart. I never once cared about Peter in the first trilogy. NEVER! I was just waiting to get him back in the mask. Marc Webb makes a real movie that happens to have "Spider-Man" in it.
This is not unlike Batman Begins. Everyone wasnt on board right away and then as time went by and once Dark Knight started it's add campaign people jumped on board.
If/When ASM2 starts to go into production everyone will be on board.

" the angst of being a nerd in a Jock environment – of having girls you can’t believe were interested in you, being interested in you. (Pretty much sums up my whole dating life)". Wow just Wow Harry.Do you really expect people to believe you were getting females,especially ones out of your league while in your teens. Snap out of your fantasy world mate.

Garfield could have been the definitive Parker because he has the perfect look for the character. But his performance is far too angry and angsty. Yes, Peter is bullied, yes Peter is underestimated and unfairly ridiculed, but he is still a happy teen with a positive disposition. He is a reflection of his aunt and uncle who are strong positive influences. Garfield's Peter Parker is far too angry and detached from his aunt and uncle. He almost acts as if they are burden to him. There is no sense of warmth from the performance. It's totally wrong. The true Peter Parker adores his aunt and uncle and has no angst toward them. If you think I'm wrong, go read the source material.
Oh yeah, and Garfield played Parker as far too cool. He didn't capture Pete's innate but charming dorkiness.

Just got back from watching it and I feel, well, indifferent.
Harry is right about the relationship between peter and gwen, however for every step this movie does right it takes 2 steps bak that are wrong.
No issue with the new costume although didnt see the need.
peter and gwen are amazing although Garfield couldve done with not over doing the teenage angst
The swinging and fights were cool and discovering his powers, plus the webshooters were always needed.
However the negatives out weighed the good!
Badly handled death of uncle Ben
the whole revenge thing
The Lizard CGI was shit!
The whole Lizard character was rushed, your meant to feel sorry for Connors like Jekyll and Hyde, not to not give a fuck!
SF didnt work as Aunt May, shame
Trying to be half Marvel half Nolan Batman, no, no no!
This wouldve been better if done like IH and do the origin recap via the titles, it wouldve left more room for full character development especially Curt Conners!
If they had gone with the relationship, true peter parker side, the action and webshooters the added the Raimi bright universe that is Spiderman, this movie couldve rowwked insted of been meh its ok!
oh yeah the whole unmasking etc was fooking lame, only the kid on the bridge made sense if at all needed.
I really want this to revert back to Marvel as Sony havent a fooking clue! Ohhh lets cross Raimi with Nolan for a hit movie! Fucking Bullshit!
At least the latest Peter Parker is only fiddle with by his uncle rather than us see Wolverine jail raped and gang banged before our eyes!

Moved a little fast once Lizard BECAME, but other than that, I really liked it. Garfield nailed Peter for me. He really gave a great performance. All the performances were heavy and emotional.. Very much enjoyed the movie.

Because I don't see many people saying Raimi should've made Spider-Man 4 - a reboot in principle was fine with most people. Retelling the origin... not so popular. All the other changes - some sounded cool, others not so much. Most of the scenes that we have seen - wait a minute this looks real sucky. Final product - mostly a huge fail it seems (I haven't seen it and probably won't pay to do so). And nothing to do with Raimi. Easy to understand, ok?

I liked the film quite a bit. I'd give it a B+. My only complaint was the lack of a Harry Osbourne. Other than Gwen, it felt like Peter didn't have any friends at all. It would have been nice to have a Harry or Eddie Brock a future frenemies. I still hope to see Venom done well in a Spider-Man film someday. But not as much as I want to see Kraven.<br />
<br />
That said, here are links to all of Harry's old Spider-Man reviews.<br />
<br />
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/12187
<br />
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/17873
<br />
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/32597
<br />
He was far more merciful on that piece of shit 'Spider-Man 3' than I could ever be. My Spiderman ratings are as follows. TASM: B+. Spiderman: B, Spiderman 2: A+, Spiderman 3: D
<br />
Here's to hoping that Kirsten Dunst never sings again!!!

... this isn't Stan Lee's Peter Parker. It's more of what PP might have been had Spidey been created more recently. But in many ways it is Steve Ditko's Spidey.
I don't agree that the fight scene with the Lizard in the high school didn't fit. That's straight out of Lee/Ditko (remember the Living Brain?).
Also, this isn't really the Gwen of the books (Gwen doing all that stuff in Oscorp at the end of the movie? Fat chance)- but she does have a few of Gwen's characteristics.
Overall, this is clearly superior to Raimi's first effort (although Raimi of course showed the way, so to speak, so it was easier for Webb). The way Peter discovers & develops his powers is much more realistic.
The acting is generally superb. Sheen was a great Uncle Ben. I don't buy Sally Field as Aunt May based on looks (gray hair, please, plus age), but we like her, we really like her in terms of what she's given to do. And Ifans does great stuff as Connors. Leary, Flash- they all work. And the film has multiple emotional moments that really, really work.
Horner actually I thought turned in a good score, though no real theme (I've always liked Elfman's). Very reminscent of "A Beautiful Mind."
Finally- i saw this in IMAX 3D, and there is NO other way to fly with this film. The action sequences are just beautiful. Visually, this film is stunning. More than once, I felt like I was seeing Spidey in action for the first time.
Sorry for those who didn't like it- but that is so your problem, not anyone else's.
I will see it at least two more times.

... the movie could maybe have been tightened a little- it did feel uneven. but overall, i'd agree with ebert that it's the second best of the series (topping spidey 2 will be tough- it may prove to be the goldfinger of this franchise).

Raped the core mythology behind the origin, and put a little too much "axe model douche" into Peter. It's a helluva pretty sportscar, but it runs like shit. The villain's motive is the same as in Burton's Batman and half a dozen other rehashes of rehashes.
The lizard is not the Hulk, morons. And we didnt need those stupid little "additions" like "Shaq"ing it, bending the uprights with a pigskin in front of 100 people, and stupid little CGI lizards acting like Connors is the Pied Piper of Herpetology.
Bless Harry for his blinders, but this movie is a sleek but arrogantly flawed 6/10...Smh.

It was an okay movie. The twink actor definitely has the Spiderman look but I think Emma Stone looked too old for high school especially next to Mr. Bean. Not sure I really needed to know Harry has a boner for high school girls in hot school outfits.....
The two problems I have with it :
It felt kinda boring the first 3/4 because you pretty much know the story arc already. It wasn't until the end fight scenes that it got really interesting. Everybody above the age of four has seen the Spiderman movies so they should have saved us the time and just started with him as Spiderman.
To me he just didn't feel like Spiderman. Almost felt more like a darker Batman. Peter Parker didn't seem like a wimp in high school and I didn't think he was enough of a smart ass as Spiderman. That is what I always liked about Spiderman. He always had smart ass comments which fits my personality.
Still, not a bad movie and worth seeing but Avengers was better IMHO and I look forward now to Batman. Hopefully they didn't make Batman into a lighter smart ass Batman.

It's annoying that they are holding off the interesting stuff regarding OSCORP in order to feed us a more snarky orgin story. I wonder if he will hire Mac Gargan to track down Uncle Ben's killer in the sequel. It didnt move me as much as the Avengers or even Captain America.

And damned if Spidey 3 isnt a better movie. Yes,the whole evil jazz club scene is ri-goddamn-diculous but....the cast,the action scenes,the fx....everything about Spidey 3 is better than the film I just saw in the theater. If you get the chance,FX is playing the hell out of the Raimi films this week...watch AMAZING and then re-watch Spidey 3 if you havent seen it since it came out. I left AMAZING thinking it was just OK,but now as I'm rewatching Spidey 3(which I hated) and honestly seeing that the new one isnt even as good as the worst of the Raimi trilogy....puts it in a whole new light. I'm actually starting to get more and more pissed about AMAZING. Heres hoping Disney buys back the rights and somehow manages to work Tobey Maguire and JK Simmons into AVENGERS 2.

There, I said it. I liked Raimi's first Spidey, but I like this one more. It's got a better Peter, a better Spidey, a better villain, a waaaaay better Gwen, the best Stan Lee cameo of all time, better web-slinging, better fight scenes, more interesting uses for the webbing, an interesting Flash Thompson who is more than a one-note bully, and a believable progression from showboating vigilante to actual hero. Pretty much the only thing I like better about Sam Raimi's version is his version of Uncle Ben. Even so, they didn't screw up his death here, so much as greatly streamline it. The story was fine, I just didn't find him quite as likeable. I honestly feel that the too-soon factor is the only thing preventing people from admitting this is the superior version. It feels more grounded in reality, but still playful and fun. Gwen is so much more awesome than MJ that it's going to really crush the young'uns when they find out what she's in for next movie or the one after. This one doesn't have the weird stylistic mishmash where Raimi can't decide if he is doing Ditko or McFarlane Spidey. Anyway, I really dug it, and I hope people can get past their hatred of Sony's moneygrubbery and just see the damned movie.

Definitely seen you around the boards, not at all supporting this. Props for admitting you liked it in spite of your early inclinations. Most of these other ass hats will never man up and admit that this thing was pretty fucking good.

You guys know Harry. You know his writing style. You know what he likes and dislikes.. Why are you here if you don't like his reviews?
It says more about you than it does about him that you take the time to insult him for sharing his thoughts with us... For free by the way.
I also thought Amazing Spider-Man was only fair.

It"ll still make tons of money on a 6 days week-end without no other new release in sight.
Which makes it a very average movie, well marketed (brain washed).
In other word, a bit of crap well packaged for consumers who don't have anything else to look for this holiday week.
It'll be quickly forgotten, and beginning Sunday, all eyes on the Dark Knight..

1) Andrew Garfield was born to play Spiderman. I was one of the main detractors eviscerating the decision by Sony to cast him, gladly, I was wrong.
2) The Spiderman action was damn near perfect. His movements, the acrobatics, the style, execution and creativity were remarkable. In fact, Marc Webb nailed this aspect of the character, in so many ways that Raimi could only dream of doing.
3) Dennis Leary, Nuff said
4) The love story was done tastefully, not to much, not to little, unlike Sam Raimi's shits fets which were basically love stories featuring Spiderman.
5) The villain was very engaging, although this is my only criticism of the movie, looks like the whiney and bitch fanbois were right, Lizard looked the best when he had the Lab coat on, they didn't show it enough but I thought they really did the character justice, as far as his motivations and reasons for going to the dark side per say.
All in all, I really enjoyed this movie, I didn't get to see it in 3-D but I will on the next viewing (yes it's that good, don't listen to the haters,).

Don't believe any of the nonsense about the filmakers going for some broody Dark Knight knockoff tone. Pete and just about all the lead characters are simply given more 3 dimensionality. And as a result the storytelling outclasses the original by far. Uncle Ben and Aunt May no longer come off as hallmark platitude speech machines (entertaining as Cliff Robertson and Rosemarie Harris were), but rather actual people. The Pete/Gwen love story not only progesses more organically, but with much more wit, charm, and humor. To be completely frank, if the fight scenes had been turned up just a couple notches, this one would knock Spider-man 2 outta the box as well. And understand this is coming from someone who, prior to The Avengers, regarded Spider-man 2 as "The" comic book movie.

Your review is exactly right.
My only disagreement with you is that we haven't heard an iconic Spiderman theme yet. Danny Elfman's score was fairly epic.
But everything else you said. Yes, I agree. I found myself when Gwen invited Peter over for dinner hoping that it was some John Hughes movie, cause that would mean OTHER things wouldn't have to happen...if you catch my drift..

When Raimi released Spider-Man in 2002, I felt like it was the best movie I had ever seen, I loved it that much. It was probably the most anticipated ever for me. It's a landmark film for comic book cinema and (I know its debatable between 2000's X-Men) really sparked the fire that is the golden age of that comic book cinema. It was extremely appropriate that 10 years later, we got the phenomenal Avengers from Joss Whedon. When Sam Raimi was announced to direct 'Spider-Man' I flipped. He deserved mainstream recognition. He was my favorite director at the time. I stumbled upon Evil Dead and was a huge fan of Bruce Campbell, Hercules, and Xena. I then started realizing that all the things I loved were connected through Sam Raimi and he had his posse of Bruce Campbell, Ted Raimi, and Rob Tapert.
When I saw Spider-Man on opening day I was more than ecstatic. Then I find out it was the highest-opening weekend ever, I was in heaven. I was so happy for Sam Raimi.
10 years later, I feel that for Joss Whedon. I love these underdogs that came out on top. It reflects the story they're telling. It also shows that the studios can be intelligent and hire the right people. It shows that intelligence is beating some of the idiotic mindset of the old conservative suits and taking over.

Spider-Man 2 looked alright from the trailers. I was in high school when Spider-Man came out. Spider-Man 2 came out on the day of my orientation for college. So the timeline in the films kinda matched up my life at the time. I had to wait a day or two to see the film. I wasn't as excited to see it as I was the first film. Though, after it was out a day, I saw a promo on television that revealed a bit more and showed that the film wouldn't play it safe and I glimpsed an unmasked Parker unconscious being held by a crowd of people in a christ-like pose. I suddenly became hyped to the brim and relinquished that 'whatever' feeling and regained the feeling of anticipation again.
Saw the film the next day and I was floating no cloud nine. Spider-Man 2 was one of the most satisfying cinematic experiences ever. The crowd was perfect, the mood was symbiotic with the film. When Aunt May gives that speech about people waiting in line to see their favorite hero that gives them hope, it was one of the most touching moments in my life; how it spoke to and about the audience watching. It's why we go to the movies. The film hit all the right notes.
I remember going home and downloading a cam and, I didn't intend on it, but when I checked out the quality, I ended up watching the whole film again. Then again and again. I went to the theater again and watched it. What an uplifting time that was. All my hopes and dreams in life were brimming to the top at that point and this movie was a reflection of that: hopes and dreams.

Spider-Man 3 had some of the most appealing trailers ever. It was the conclusion to an arc (later turning out to be the actual conclusion to the series) and what went through my mind were imaginings of something so fucking epic, it would make men openly weep in the theater. Lots of anticipation, then finally the time had come.
One thing I was worried about was Peter and MJ's relationship and how that would be handled. I couldn't picture it. They were never together in the first two films until the very end of 2, so I just couldn't picture a real relationship aside from the initial happy moment of love confessed. That aspect surprised me and I thought they nailed it. The relationship felt real to me.
I adore Spider-Man 3. It was definitely not that epic film that I envisioned from the trailers, but it surprised me in a different way. It was very touching and very symbolic of the story being told in Raimi's world.
I understand some of the hate it gets, it definitely had this change in vibe. The goo falling out of the sky was probably the worst moment. It was too coincidental, even for these films. But my mind makes logic and tells me that it was multiple little asteroids falling over New York and that's why people are so fucking angry in New York and in life, especially these days. Everyone hates everything. I also saw it as "God testing Peter", even though I don't believe in God, I see it as Sam Raimi being the hand of fate and throwing Peter's next challenge directly near him. After a while, no matter how you show it, all these villains coming into existence is going to look ridiculous as time goes on in this universe. I saw the symbiote and Sandman's origins as a jokey representation of that: "We've seen all this origin bullshit before, let's get on with the real story".
And that real story are the relationships between Peter, MJ, and Harry. I think Spider-Man 3 is a masterpiece. And I always point this out. That last battle is a wonderful representation of the whole story. Peter deals with his guilt of Uncle Ben's death (represented by Sandman/Flint Marko and his guilt, its Peter's guilt incarnate) and his responsibility as Spider-Man (Venom and Eddie Brock representing the people that are effected by Peter/Spider-Man). His responsibility as Spider-Man chokes him while the guilt of his Uncle's death smothers him and never goes away, all while he reaches for the love of his life caught in his web. He is helped through this tough time in his life by his best friend, Harry, who is also affected by Peter's turmoil. Harry is literally torn apart between Peter (his obsession with Spider-Man) and his father's secrets. At the end, Peter finally forgives himself and realizes that he can't be responsible for saving everyone. People make their own choices.
In a way, I see Spider-Man 3 as the best of the trilogy. The (sometimes valid) complaints people make about this film are so fucking minute that its ridiculous.

Read some of those negative reviews for yourself. The vast majority of these critics only dislike the film because it is a reboot. A bunch of angry nerds and Raimi apologists unable to view the Amazing Spider-Man on its own merits.
'Tis sad.

is not the dancing, MJ singing or even the sacrilege of making Sandman Uncle Ben's real killer. All of those are terrible mistakes though. The most annoying thing is that for a trilogy that base itself around a love story, with Mary-Jane Watson from the comics - a better character than Gwen Stacey ever was btw - they then turned her into a complete selfish, unsympathetic fucking bitch in the last movie. I hated her. Also she got way uglier real fast.

The Amazing Spider-Man was announced in one of the worst possible ways: It came off as the reason for the cancellation of Raimi's Spider-Man 4, which was in pre-production. I was livid. I was very much looking forward to what Raimi had in store for Peter Parker's life; an older Peter Parker, one with grown up problems.
I did feel that they should stop with Spider-Man 3, because it was apparent that the emergence of villains was getting over the top and it just felt played out. Spider-Man 3 was so appropriate as an ending. So I'm not too sorry Spider-Man 4 never happened. I just didn't like the fact that it was going to happen, and was being made, and then it just got shut down over seemingly petty differences.
In hindsight, it may have been the right choice. From the sound of the drafts for 4, it felt tired. I also heard much later that Sam Raimi told the studio basically, 'I told my story.' That this moving forward of 4 was basically just a cash grab to keep something big going. I love Raimi's Spider-Man universe so damn much, and would love to see more, but it does have to end sometime and it ended on a high note. Better than petering out. Spun a bad pun, I know.
But when they started announcing the director and the actors for The Amazing Spider-Man, there was hope.
The trailer came out and there was hope.
Seeing the film, I am stunned. It's everything in that hope and more.
I truly am pleased with this film. It's so fucking emotional and heavy. More so than Raimi's. I feel like the story of Spider-Man is a real one and Raimi's trilogy was the best way that Hollywood could fantasize about a Spider-Man universe. And this film was more of a closer to the true story feel. It was a more real-world, real people version.
I have nothing but praise for this.
Those moments of fighting back tears were numerous. Peter's relationship with his aunt and uncle. The moment where he goes off on his uncle about not having his father in his life resonated with me because I've had that moment. The guilt about doing stupid shit that hurts the ones you love. Why is it that something really bad always happens because of a self-righteous moment you have out of passionate anger towards people in your life?
I love how smart the characters were. It almost feels stupid saying characters because they were real people to me. Flash, Captain Stacy, everyone had realistic turns. They didn't stay as these one-note cliches. They had reason and empathy under these masks they wore to hide themselves from everyone.
All the foreshadowing of Gwen with Peter constantly discovering that trick where he shoots a web to catch someone: with that kid and even Gwen.
The total empathy that Garfield brought to Peter. For everyone and their character. It was flawless in character.
That whole dynamic between Peter and Captain Stacy. Those words exchanged on that rooftop.
I remember a guy sitting next to me, leaning all the way back in his chair in the final 15 minutes of the film, with his hand holding his mouth, probably catching tears leaking from under those big IMAX glasses while muffling the tremble of his lips as they react to the waves of emotional moments reverberating from what he was experiencing.
That porch scene, Gwen's confrontation with Peter at the end, her words to him, that's what really almost got me (never cried in a theater, this is one of those moments that got me close. I was glad I had those glasses on.) The whole delivery of that scene, of all the scenes.
To feel like this Spider-Man is the best just blows my fucking mind after what Raimi delivered and how I felt about those films.
I am so in love with this new universe. I just want the same people to make the sequels, PLEASE.
The darkness and serious tone are so FUCKING PERFECT. Don't lighten it up for the idiots that can't handle it.
I witnessed a film that wasn't afraid to unmask itself and share what lies underneath the layers that no one else has the courage to reveal.
Thank you for this film.

Nice write up.
I feel very much the same way you do. It really is Spider-Man done so much better than what was done before.
My only real complaint, is that it started to look more and more like Raimi's movies the closer we got to the end. I wanted all of the action beats to resemble the carjacker scene. Not a CGI fest like we got with the previous installments.
Also, damn you crane guy! I mean was that really necessary?
Final word to the haters. If you want to hate on this movie, fine. But at least watch it first.

I felt it was just a little better than Spiderman 1, and definitely better than 3 but leagues below Spiderman 2. The visuals were top notch and the 3D was great, but the story was just so disjointed. Every time I was watching a scene and they would introduce what seemed like a key plot element it would switch gears. And Connors as Lizard's motivations were all over the place. It reminded me of Danny Devito's Penquin in Batman Returns with the sympathetic arc. I dunno, I'm a pretty big Spidey fan and this movie just didn't get to me like I thought it would. Needed some more focus, I guess.

I find it leaps and bounds above Spider-Man 1 and 3 though. Raimi's first try has not aged well at all, if you re-watch it. I did recently, and rolled my eyes every 12 minutes at some cornball nonsense.
Spider-Man 2 was damn near flawless, in spite of following a lot of the same beats as its predecessor and using a tired dramatic arc of Spidey losing his powers.
3 speaks for itself. Yelch.
I really liked just about everything about TASM. I don't get the whining about particular aspects, such as Ben's death and the lack of the "Great power" line. It wasn't a carjacking and he never said that line in the comics, either. People always pick and choose how faithful they want this shit to be, and it's always to serve their argument.
I liked the vigilante-mode Spidey. And the car thief scene actually played out brilliantly once in context, and actually became he humbling experience Parker needed upon the revelation at the Stacy's.
I will admit though, I would have preferred an origin re-telling a la Incredible Hulk, if only for more time with Conners. His story felt pretty rushed.
This film belongs right on the shelf next to Spider-Man 2, in my opinion. I'm smart enough to know they come from two separate universes, but are still both great Spider-Man stories.

"I remember a guy sitting next to me, leaning all the way back in his chair in the final 15 minutes of the film, with his hand holding his mouth, probably catching tears leaking from under those big IMAX glasses while muffling the tremble of his lips as they react to the waves of emotional moments reverberating from what he was experiencing."

you were around when the first transformers movie talkbacks were going crazy. you had stupid opinions then and you have stupid opinions now. Andrew Garfield was born to play Spider-man? Really? A good looking 6'1" skinny Pom was born to play Spidey? And then he wasn't much like Spidey and even less like Peter Parker?
Read some comics you cunt. you'd never make that idiotic statement.

Where the fuck are all these idiots getting this idea that Garfield was a great Peter or Spidey? None of these idiots read comics, Peter has a specific personality. One of a dork who talks to himself a lot and is welll versed in pop culture. definitely not mopey and nervous like Garfield.

but have never read the comics, so their knowledge of Spidey is from the movies and they base all opinions on this base of movie knowledge. And he likes them, thinks Sony hit Amazing Spiderman out of the park. Can you imagine if guys like this read comics
"This is Spider-man?!!!!! What the fuck are these movies. This is fucking awesome!!!!1111 ELEVENTY ONE"
I just dont get humans

I'd say maybe Chandler in Friends. Maybe Marty McFly. He's dorky in the Ditko comics, but does get female attention and isn't always moping. He worries, he can be witty. He's an average kid in many ways, but also really really smart. He is not a dick, not after Uncle Ben died. He is likeable. I don't think either movies had someone terribly mis-cast - remember James Cameron was planning on using Michael Bhien from the Terminator! It's the character of Spider-Man they haven't nailed - the wise-cracker. That's totally who he is. I haven't heard he does much of that in this movie, as he didn't in the last ones. So they've fucked up the main character again.

Sorry you didn't enjoy it. What can I say? I read Spider-Man comics throughout my childhood. And while I haven't picked one up in about 15 years, this hit more than enough of the right notes for me.
I prefer it to Raimi's origin story, and while I feel the Connors stuff was way underdeveloped, he was still a superior villain to anyone from the original trilogy, save Doc Ock.
If you honestly believe that Garfield was not note-perfect as Peter Parker, I seriously cannot find the words to argue with you. I'd rather just walk away and hope you're kidding.

There are more Spidey wise-cracks in this movie than there are in all three of Raimi's movies combined. He talks shit the entire time he fights the Lizard in the school battle.
Also, what a lot of people are missing is that this film is very condensed and tight in terms of the timeframe. Weeks and months do not pass between when Ben is killed and when he starts crimefighting and even upon donning the suit.
So I found it perfectly acceptable that there was a bit of edge and angst to him. He very recently lost the most important person in his life. It made sense within the confines of the story.

I heard Cameron state with my own ears (on the Howard Stern show) that he wanted Leo DiCaprio for Spider-Man. This was shortly after Titanic, and it looked like for all the world that Spider-Man was going to be Cameron's follow-up. The awful script makes me think we dodged a bullet - but looking at Cameron's B.O. record, a JC SM would've been MASSIVE, especially with Leo in the lead.

He is not Peter Parker. You obviously don't read comics. Last week I read the remaining 40 issues of the Brand New Day arc, That was Spider-man, I compare Garfield's Peter to that or the Ultimate Peter or even the younger silver age peter and the spectacular spidey tv show which is an amalgam of all and he is like none of them. And all those Peter's are just about the same character. Read some comics cunt

You're fucking kidding me right? Peter is not mopey, he talks to himself a lot and is for the most part self deprecating. not quiet and mopey.
And his origin is supposed to be chance and random. Not almost planned. Uncle Ben going for the gun of a random street burglar and the spiders being designed rather than just a random accident. takes away from the true origin of guilt

I would've been OK with this reboot if it was actually a good movie, but it's not.
Even if you take away everything you knew about the characters' history, mannerisms or appearances, they just... don't work well. Break down each character, and everything about them is cookie-cutter. So forced and contrived and just plain silly.
One quick example: Uncle Ben is mad at Peter for forgetting to pick up Aunt May from work, so Ben has to walk her home in the dark. Is that when Ben delivers this ridiculous long-ass voicemail to Peter that we hear at the end? WTF?
I couldn't stop giggling at the scenes that were supposed to be thrilling or serious or scary. We've seen these scenarios so many times before. The presentation, the delivery, the dialogue. Rushed. Forced. Contrived. Horribly executed. Silly.
This whole fiasco is what we knew all along: it's nothing. but. a. cash. grab. So congratulations, Sony, you pulled it off. Keep the rights and laugh at us all the way to the bank. Well done.
But yeah, Emma Stone is so fucking hot in those mini-skirts and go-go boots. True dat.

Pretty sure that voicemail got left when Peter is with Connors, and he ignores Ben's call.
Then, later, Peter comes home and Ben confronts him for forgetting to pick up Aunt May. Ben never walked Aunt May home. He was working. He states at the school that he had to switch shifts in order to meet with Peter's principal -- which is why Peter was needed to pick up his Aunt in the first place.
He states pretty clearly that Aunt May took the train by herself and then walked 12 blocks home.

I said talks to himself, not mopes to himself. Read a comic one day and you'd understand. People who have praise for Garfield don't read comics. Peter is actually a great character and Spidey is hilarious. None of which Garfield was.

And don't get me started on superherohype, most of the people there are young kids and girls, they are for the most part fucking retards who only read the popular books and some don't even read them at all.
using one site, other sites don't like Garfield as Peter. You are failing in your argument, you say he is a great Peter and Spider-man but that's it, you just say he's great, but according to what? You have no frame of reference, you don't know what Peter and Spider-man is really like so how can you say he is great? And seriously a kid like that in real life, I wouldn't be friends with such a mopey asshole.

In certain respects, superior to the Raimi version.
I like Garfield in the role of Parker more than Maguire. The suit looks better, too. Good vibrant red & blue, with black weblines. And of course, webshooters!
But, I would have preferred them to stick closer to the comic book in many areas, including the details of the origin and the loss of Uncle Ben... but veering from the source material is something we've come to expect from superhero movies in varying degrees, I guess.
However, they've tried to cram so much into the movie that it inevitably suffers to some degree.
Having both Uncle Ben's and Captain Stacy's deaths in the movie tends to lessen the emotional impact of both tragedies somewhat. Captain Stacy's demise should have been kept until the sequel.
Interesting mid-credits coda.

Sheez, why do they even let people like you who ingest their own feces and upload it to youtube congregate with the rest of civilized society?
Maybe it's the years of golden showers that's responsible for your involuntary gesticulations of the tongue, that utters nothing but your subjective affinity for diseased cocks in your well exercised rectal cavity.
Now that the insults are out the way you little fuck. Let me educate your silly ass. I can't believe you're still but hurt over me decimating you in the Transformers debate. Everything that I predicted about it came into fruition, while the exact opposite of EVERYTHING you predicted materialized which demonstrated that your opinions contain zero credibility.

Stupid fucking cocksucker. Why do you waste your time telling people their opinions, likes, and tastes should exactly mirror yours? No one gives a fuck if you didn't like it. It wasn't made for little whiney fucking bitches like you. Take your fucking tampon out of your cunt and please go complain to that little voice inside of your head (you know, the only one who agrees with your deluded opinions) because obviously you're in the minority here (like most crazy people).

I am so tired of you pretentious comic nerds getting on your soap box and preaching about what belongs and doesn't belong in a Spider-Man movie. Go fucking write one if you think you can do better. But leave me the hell out of it. Picking up a Spider-Man comic after 15-odd years is not going to make me suddenly realize your point of view.
The movie didn't work for you? Fine. I can care less.
Stop worrying about my opinion, and stop taking it so fucking personally that I enjoyed the movie and loved Garfield as Parker.
You funny book reading man children infuriate me. Get over your fucking selves, know it alls.
I hope your comic book store burns down.

You've done a good job explaining how you felt about Raimi's films and also this new one. I don't believe you are a plant, but I do wonder if we have different taste, you know what I mean? Could you be so kind as to list say 5-10 other super-hero movies you think worked, or you love? or any you hated? Cheers.

Captain Stacy shouldn't have died without us getting to know him better, and the aftermath of Uncle Ben's death wasn't very good, and everyone in the frigging movie shouldn't have learned that Peter was Spidey, but it was still pretty good. I think Garfield is a better Peter/Spidey than Maguire, despite being ten years too old for the part and I really like Martin Sheen's Uncle Ben, but nothing can beat Cliff Robertson. I didn't like The Lizard's face or his amazing ability to make explosive potions using ingredients found in a high school but the monster movie aspect was kinda cool. The movie will definitely spawn a franchise and I'm looking forward to seeing were the series goes.

Don't bother trying to come up with good material, actors or screenplays:
Just reboot a movie that was made ten years ago, add Twilight style actors, a bit of Nolan's Darkness, and there you have it.
Don't bitch if we get reboots for the next 10 years and the overall choice and quality of movies goes down in flames.

The problem with originality has existed for some time now and its only getting worse. I haven't even seen the movie yet but I knew it would make money. Its freaking Spider-Man. I'm not even saying it should. If a movie like Vampires Suck can make more money than Scott Pilgrim on opening weekend (even if you didn't like it the movie should have made more than Vampires Suck), how can you expect anything original to be made?<br>
I have books upon books on my shelf that would KILL anything like Twilight, Harry Potter, or Hunger Games. Yet those books aren't safe bets for Hollywood to line their pockets with. Its our own fault! We line up like sheep for things that shouldn't even be made at all. Spider-Man reboot? That isn't even as bad as remaking the Dark Shadows into a stupid freaking comedy movie. How many SAWs, SCREAMs, Stupid movies by the same guys who made Scary Movie do we need to see? Yet people pay for that shit. Spider-Man isn't even in the same league as the bad movies we pay to see. I'm convinced all the screenwriters and suits in Hollywood are too stupid to consider an original idea and we let them get away with spoon-feeding us crap.

"Hi gang, Harry here with my obligatory review of THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN. Heres the think - when Avi Arad and Stan Lee and a scary lawyer sit you down in a special red room and tell you no more Blu-Rays or Avengers 2 set visits unless you tell those kids to go see The Amazing Spider-Man - well - you say how high? I don't say how high, i mean that's how high I jump. You knowe what I</p><p>
I rolled my Power Chair into a wheelchair-accessable theater with Yoko, crammed one hand down my sweatoants and the other into a barrel of hot buttered popcorn - you thought i was gonna say "hot buttered Yoko" but - Yoko throws up whenever I touch her or use the words "vagina juice" in a sentence - I didn't want to smell like puke while I nurse a rage boner for Emma Stone for two hrs. And then the movie started.</P><P>
I remember when I was eight and Fathergeek took me to New York to meet Stan lee. He crushed a spider in a Kleenex and handed it to Stan Lee and said "Draw this like a man" and a little phenomenon called "Spider-Man" was born. Dare I say "amazing"? Stan Lee laughed and ate the spider Kleenex - and the eight year old me knew it would be okay - when your eight and you think Supderman is real and your peeing yourself because Stan Lee's mustache is scary - well, let's just say everything turned out pretty amazing.</p><p>
Andrew Garfield is great as Spidr-Man but enough of that. Emma Stone was in the movie and man - I would have almost paid for a tickert and Yoko's liver to see a movie with just Emma Stone in it - two houres and only three Emma Stone pantie shots? Their is one scene where Garfield (not the cat) spews spiderweb all over Emma Stone's bresteses - and man - let's just say my one hand was in the right place at the right time and that Yoko will not be doing any projectile vomiting tonight - that's the money shot, Sony! Amazing!</p><p>
Is it as good as Raimi's movies? Who cares? Raimi didn't do this one. Emma Stone did this one. Also, the Lizard - he comes at you like a wet fist stinking of popcorn butter and pussy juice and rage. At some points - the 3D is so good - your just sitting in the theater thinking "Is rthis real? Is Emma Stone's boot gonna just come through the screen and crunch down into my piss piglet?"</p><p>
So, let's some this up: Emma Stone, no Raimi, Lizzard, 3 panties shots in 3-fucking-D, mechanical ,web shooters! Excelsior!"

I guess we're all getting in line for that latter one.
On Spidey: I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. Andrew Garfield played Peter with James Dean-ish tics and insecurity and it worked. Emma Stone shone brightly on screen, and the movie lifted whenever she was around.
The weak aspects were definitely a thinly drawn villain, and a vague plot to transform Manhattan's residents into lizards (?).
I thought Marc Webb mostly did a fine job, the action sequences were well shot and stage (the school fight) and he too full advantage of the screen chemistry between his two leads at all opportunities.
So, I'm definitely looking forward to a sequel.....and fucking that guy's wife too.

Everything the Avengers did right Spider-man did wrong.
Even the after credits scene. As we walked into the theater the worker told everyone "Don't forget to stay after the credits for a treat!!"
We stayed. Saw the scene - lots of "that's it?" and "weak ass" afterwards.
The trailers for Dark Knight Rises got more cheers and claps than Spidey.
Not a good sign.

I just felt that it got more things right than it got wrong.
I will say that without Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, this screenplay (weak!) wouldn't have stood a chance with other actors.
The short post credits sequence? Yeah, it was lame, and if you go see the movie, don't bother sticking around for it. It reveals absolutely nothing.

Who did this one---James Horner, right? Because the score was the embodiment of 'filler background noise'.
I almost miss Danny Elfman. Almost.
But again, I liked the movie overall, so nitpicks and all that.

It did get a few things right but I felt it got a lot more wrong, and I couldn't help but to constantly compare it to Sam Raimis while watching it - something I'd hope I wouldn't be doing.
It just felt so cookie-cutter/formula yet incoherent and choppy. It felt more like a super long promo for a video game and less like a film.
I still have no idea who the person is in the post credits sequence. Nor do I care.
I'd be thrilled if I didn't have to see Spidey again until Avengers 2 but Sony's gotta eat.

I won't see it on basic principle. It's hollywood capitalizing on the mainstream's love of comic book movies. This movie is SOOOOO not necessary. Why can't we have an original movie for once on the 4th of July...like Independence Day. Or for gods sake, think of a comic book character that hasen't been made into a movie within the past 15 fucking years. Screw Hollywood for producing this film..such a waste of money. It's reconstituted vomit.

I don't think one was better than the other, per say; they were just different takes on the character.
Garfield did have the Dean-ish angsty moments that made his Peter a bit more compelling, and dare I say, dangerous. That final scene that he shares with Sally Field and the eggs, that was gold. That made the movie for me.

Do they explain the suit? It cost over a million dollars to develop the suit in Raimi's movie and took many months of development by some of the movie industries best.
How does Peter Parker pull this off? At least Nolan's Batman films have a reasonable explanation for the suit, vehicles and gadgets.

We get a montage of: Peter sketching in a notebook in class; Peter sewing his OG mask; Peter clicking through a series of Olympic luge suits, then designing his web shooters.
And that's about it.
I actually like the new costume more than the Raimi version, the silver booties aside. It has a pebbled, textured look, different from the older raised webbing look.

That is a fucking contradiction if I ever saw one. LOL. Suspend your fucking belief and enjoy the movie. P.S. I haven't seen it yet. I'm sure its not as bad as these people are saying though. Seeing it Sunday.

Thank christ they didn't go with some catchy b.s. that some of you nerds require for a fucking superhero flick. John Williams and Danny Elfman scores are overrated just because they're catchy, but they're rarley effective for a movie. William's score for Jaws was the only catchy score that also demonstrated the effectivness of and enhanced the tone of the film. His Score for Superman is nothing but a catchy theme that does absolutley nothing to add to the films atmosphere or add any type of emotion, especially any type of tension. Williams and Elfman are talented folks and all, but not every film, especially regarding superheroes needs some type of fucking jingle. :P

I guess it was made for moronic cunts like you. Retarded idiots who love sploisions and bayformers. It's because of idiots like you that studio movies have gotten worse over the years. A lowest common denominator dumb cunt. And Gay porn and child porn attacks? what the fuck? You really are an idiot, always have been.

The action was great, the visuals were great, and Garfield himself is a great Petey and Spidey both, especially in how he interacts with everybody, Uncle Ben and Gwen Stacy especially. The script's cluttered like hell, the wall-to-wall music's a little annoying, and the Lizard looks a bit too much like Koopa from the Super Mario movie. But all in all, great.

project shut down? check.
start human trials on self? check.
talk to self? check.
toss stuff off a bridge? check.
why the hell did he want to infect the entire city when he was so recently distraught with the idea of his boss testing on an innocent?
did nobody notice the lizard rat at Oscorp the next day?

Seriously, the number of haters here since ASM pulled off a nice Tuesday premiere record seems to consist of 3 or 4 desperate multi-account trolls who are pathetically attempting to still trash the movie. It's really sad that these mouth breathers have nothing better to do than sit in their basements and cry on the 4th of July. But what do I know, I'm supposedly just a plant. Oh, wait, I actually went to the movie! I give it a 8 out of 10. My kid gives it a 10. But then, he's 10, and he loved it, even the icky love story bits. This movie was miles better than the Raimi ones. Spidey cracked wise more in this flick than in all 3 previous S-M movies that he didn't. I'll come back tomorrow with Wednesday's totals, just to remind you how it's doing.

It will be a good movie if the exit polls show that people liked it, and if it holds in second week against Ice Age.
And last I checked, box-office revenues don't make a movie good or bad, there are plenty of reminders of that throughout movie history.

After watching the horrendous, poorly paced, disjointed mess that was the amazing Spiderman today, it pretty much reinforced my initial assessment that Raimi's films are far superior than this very unnecessary reboot. For all you dumbass geeks out there who actually think that Andrew Garfield is a better Peter Parker than Toby McGuire, you better reread the original spiderman comic series; not the modern revamped photoshopped version, but the original Stan Lee/ Steve Ditko version! Peter Parker is a simple, innocent, nerdy, boring teenager trying to fit it, with his only vice is being one very smart bookworm. He's a bit of a Mama's boy. He isn't cute, nervous and quirky jerky like Garfield and doesn't ride a cool skateboard, nor does he flirt with the ladies with ease. Everything he does is a struggle, and just when he thinks things are going his way for once, shit happens. Garfield's version is the antithesis of what Peter Parker should be. On the other hand, Tobey's version, although not perfect, best captures the spirit of Peter Parker, who is wide eyed, innocent, smart and empathetic. There is more feeling, emotion and empathy in the opening school bus scene in spiderman 1 than in the entire amazing spiderman movie. Overall, the new Spiderman movie is so disjointed and poorly written that you might as well string a bunch of YouTube clips and call that a movie. Lots of plot holes and inplaisibilities that would give Prometheus a run for its money. Sorry, Sally Field is not Aunt May and why the fuck did they get Martin Sheen as uncle Ben? Lame. Worst of all, the business with Peter Parker's parents was as bad as Qui Gon explaining the force in midichlorian terms. I equate this reboot to the Superman reboot where it was unneeded and totally forgettable.
If there is a petition to bring back
Sam Raimi back to Spiderman, I'll be first to sign it.

The spectacular spidey cartoon nailed Peter, a lot of Ultimate influence but it's like they backtracked the modern Peter/Spidey and made him young rather than just copy the silve age version. That version of Peter is the Peter most comic book readers know

Tell it like it is! Problem is that this movie is financially succeeding...which means pretty soon we'll be getting a "darker, grittier" Dick Tracy reboot.
All thanks to kids who aren't old enough to remember the first two Raimi films, the McFarlane comics (as flawed as they were they were still pretty good) or read these planted Hollywood bullshit reviews.

This was a badass Spidey movie. But, I say that while admitting I am in the minority that thinks Raimi's second was a terrible movie. This is the first one to actually get the Peter Parker character pretty dead on. And the complaints Harry had about the parents and Oscorp and stuff just seem like an opportunity for them to weave in some of the things from the fantastic recent story lines in the comic that have expanded Spider-Man's origin. If you like Spider-Man the comic book character this is the closest movie yet to that. If you like Sam Raimi then it might not be your thing.

Because he did in the Raimi flicks - we all know that. Someone had to speak that great line and Raimi sensibly gave it to Uncle Ben. Duh. Most of us know the line was narration. I'm not pissed that Sheen didn't say those immortal words, or that his lines were laughably inferior. No, I'm more pissed every day that the entire relationship with Uncle Ben and Aunt May was a total joke, and Uncle Ben's death was a waste that didn't come close to invoking a shred of sense for responsibility in Douche Parker. The whole point of Ben's death is Peter's inaction. That isn't the way this garbage played out. It played out rushed and jagged. Ill conceived. And, as the Kid said in his review I think, impetus for revenge instead of helping people. I'm done talking about this horseshit movie. I wonder if Harry hates it yet, as he can't possibly continue to lie to himself. Bring on the Dark Knight.

Negatives:
Why did every freakin' scene where either Spider-Man or The Lizard take place at night? I get that Peter has school during the day but this isn't Batman.
The first hour was unnecessary. No one cares what happened to his parents. The whole "mystery" surrounding that is the equivalent of the Black Boots guy from the mid-"Halloween" films.
The Lizard is a city-wide menace! Evacuate the entire city... but only from 52nd down. The rest of the city is fine. We are in possession of The Lizard's plan and know EXACTLY where he will strike.
I'm convinced that during the scene where Peter wants to tell Gwen that he's Spider-Man, the director said to Garfield, "I want you to play this like you're COMPLETELY retarded."
Did we need a montage of how good a skateboarder Peter is now?
Spider-Dick: The Spidey quips weren't funny at all. The way it was played, he sounded like a massive prick. Its obviously him at the beginning of his career and getting used to things but it was being played for laughs that just didn't come.
The Tone: Again, this is Spider-Man! Not Batman! Everything was dark, somber and dreary. There wasn't nothing fun about it.
The Editing-- Specifically during the subway scene. Very choppy. Could've been a really funny scene but, again, the movie is practically humorless.
Positives:
Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben-- so good he made it look easy.
The car/kid scene
Cool web-slinging
The library bit
Emma Stone-- when she was given something to do.

What most everyone is saying is that it isn't very good and that it will probably underperform at the box office. But Spider-Man will still sell tickets. This one will lead to lower ticket sales for the next one and so on until they just kill the entire franchise with shitty movies. Then they will give it back to Marvel.

Except it is good. Not flawless, but good.
The box office will be fine. It's going to be a trilogy whether you like it or not. So suck it up.
Who knows, maybe Spidey will be in one of The Avengers sequels.

Yeah, SONY's got a problem on their hands all right. Who're they gonna get to count all their buckets of money???
Ans a new Ice Age movie is no spider killer.
Unfortunately, ASM's box office bonanza just means Hollywood's gonna be giving us a shit ton of more creatively bankrupt reboots and remakes in the coming years.

"The filmmakers cite Steve Ditko's early work on 'Spider-Man' and Brian Bendis's 'Ultimate Spider-Man' comic, and Batman Begins as an influence on the film."
There you go. This movie was in terrible hands right from the conception!

Garfield and Stone were cute as a button as a couple, but the movie as a whole was pretty by-the-numbers. Raimi as least embraced the pulpiness of the story, and his direction added zip and energy, and the story combined the emotional and the action aspects beautifully.
The reboot played a bit like a checklist of the earlier film, also.
I think Garfield will go on and be a big movie star. He's got the acting chops. Stone is already a start in her own right. I was just let down by Webb's rather pedestrian direction, dispite his fine handling of the cast.
My litmus test is ...would I want to buy this as an addition to my library when released on video....in this case, nope.

As if it does well - it will be the proverbial "starting gun" on rebooting everything nonstop.
As in, reboot all of Harry Potter in 5 years or so.
Reboot X-men in a few years.
Same for Batman.
Superman reboot a few years after the next trilogy...
Lord of the Rings reboot again in 5 years or more...same for Hobbit, etc...
And 5 years after that - we start all over again with the 3rd generation reboots...5 years later, we go again with generation 4 and so on.
Instead of new movies - we'll get cyclic generational reboots and it will be closer and closer together to the threshold where people won't go/pay...but if they will, it will most definitely happen. Carrots on a stick to the industry and not much effort needed - of course it will happen.
Now, that's a bit cynical and likely an exaggeration but the profit seekers are not unlike certain animals that will gorge themselves to death if given enough food - if this movie works, it will be proof to the financiers that a studio can basically construct a movie without signature A-list talents behind the camera driving the creativity of the effort (no offense to Webb).
I don't know - if it is a good movie, does it matter if our beloved Raimi made it or if Sony did by committee? I have no love for Sony and much love for Raimi but at the end of the day, if its a great movie, does it matter?
Sure it's unlikely but what if?

Yep.
Even the tastes of film critics has dwindled when movies like 21 Jump Street, Bad Teacher and the Hangover are hailed as comedic masterpieces.
Most critics loved Prometheus despite it's glaring flaws.

I'm thinkin' matinee 3D IMAX, popcorn(w/extra fake butter slop) and gummi bears.
I've suffered through the 2D version - is the 3D IMAX version super awesome & pretty or meh?
O. And since they're making a sh-tty trilogy can I have Juggernaut in the sequel as in issue 229 "Nothing Can Stop the Juggernaut"?
no goblins.
thx.

Seeing how they are hinting at Venom movies, he almost has to be introduced via Spidey. If I remember right Venom teams up with Spidey to defeat Carnage. This would make sense for a continuation of Venom movies.

The entire point of those mid or post-credit stingers is to tease or even set up the next installment. Or, at bare minimum, generate excitement about what is still to come.
Whoever that "shadowed" man was, (he just seemed, I dunno, too Sith for my taste to be Norman), it would have added so much more to just have Connors say his name when he screamed to leave Peter alone. And then a smash-cut as opposed to a fade-out.
If the line had been You leave him alone, Quentin!, for example, my theater probably would have erupted into cheers.

I thoroughly fucking enjoyed! Did it have flaws? yes, but my fucking god we finally FINALLY get a goddamn Spider-Man movie and all people do here is fucking bitch! "oh umm urrr spiderman took off his mask again ughh" "oh ummm urr uncle bens death scene was just so meh" Shut the fuck up! I am sick and tired of the lame, half baked, nit picking bullshit! Sam Rami's Spider-Man movies were fucking ass! Even Spider-Man 2! THAT WAS SO ASS! The Amazing Spider-Man is hands down the best treatment of Spider-Man I have had the privilege to witness(in the sense that in my lifetime I got to see a REAL GODDAMN SPIDER MAN MOVIE!) Balance out the good with the bad here and you still have a FANFUCKINGTASTIC MOVIE! The actors were great and really reeled you into the story, the suit looks way better in action then it does in the stills, the story was fucking comic booky, SPIDER MAN WAS GODDAMN SPIDER MAN HE HAD SHOOTERS AND HE WAS ALWAYS BEING A SMART ASS IN BATTLE! Parker was smart! They showed it, THEY REALLY FUCKING SHOWED IT! In the old movies it was like "Oh Im smart see? I goto college and I have glasses so I must be smart!" but they never really showed him doing anything smart! All he fucking did was cry, deliver pizza's, and cry more! THAT SOUND LIKE A INTELLIGENT PERSON?! NOPE SOUNDS LIKE A HORMONAL PIZZA DELIVERY WOMEN! NOT GODDAMN SPIDER MAN! BEFORE I GET ANY BODY TELLING ME I NEED TO READ A SPIDER MAN COMIC, I FUCKING DO! I READ THE MARVEL REPRINTS OF THE OLD STUFF! SO I THINK I HAVE A FIRM FUCKING GRASP OF WHAT SPIDERMAN SHOULD BE AND THAT WAS IT!!!!

We get it. You've been reading this shit for years, long before anyone else cared, movie studios and the general population included.
Here is your gold star.
The thing is though -- these movies are not made strictly for YOU and your posse of nerds, and I am saying this as someone who grew up going to the comic-book store at least once a week.
All this bitching about how this isn't the way it should be, or this character isn't how he/she was in the comics is pointless. These movies are made to appeal to a much broader audience than people who still read comics.
And guess what? You should honestly be BLOWING the people you come on these boards to blast and call morons. You think YOU are the one that propelled Iron Man to $300 million at the domestic box office? Cut it the fuck out. The uninformed sheep that know nothing about comic-books are the reason you got a fucking Avengers movie.
Superheros appeal to everyone. Comic-books do not. Face it, and move on.
Here is an example. I took my chick to see TASM. She loved it. Totally wasn't expecting such a good romance to unfold, and ate it up. When we left the theater, she asked me what I liked, etc, because she knew I grew comics as a kid, based on the huge collection I have stored in the attic. I told her the one thing that bugged me was Gwen finding out who Spider-Man was, because in the comics, she hated Spider-Man and blamed him for the death of her father. I felt that added so much more drama and angst that Peter could never reveal himself to her. My chick, who had NEVER picked up a comic-book in her life, respectfully disagreed and said that she wanted the girl to know -- that the girlfriend SHOULD know.
My point is, the average person does not know detailed bits of history from comic books. For every guy like me who knows how it was, there are hundreds of people like my chick, who don't and like it just fine the way they just saw it.
Let the brave name-calling from behind a keyboard begin.

Anyone who isn't civil enough to debate their tastes for film with a modicum of decorum will not garner any respect from me. That type of psychotic behavior won't be tolerated, and I will lambast you with every negative label I can scribe in return.
Now go back to being the angry little bridge troll that you will always be. You fucking cunt.

for five minutes. Spider-Man wears a mask. If I see the actor's face all the time it's not spider-man any more. I'm not the only one who hates that shit, why not just change the entire costume, take away the webbing OH WAIT YOU FUCKING DID AND GAVE HIM STUPID SILVER BOOTIES TOO! FOR NO FUCKING REASON. oh sorry, silly old nit-picky me

Still seems strange some people complaining about all the action happening at night - only the bridge scene, the car thief bits and the end take place at night - the longest fight scene in the film takes place in broad daylight and the only other scene not in daylight is in a sewer.
Peter Parker goes to school during the day. He's looking for a car thief. These two things alone should answer why some scenes occur at night.
The ending of all three Spider-Man films before this all took place at night. I don't think any more of this film is set at night than the others. Most of Spider-Man 3 was set at night. Seems like a lot of the criticisms of this film are just knee jerk reactions to a larger problem that clouds the fact that while this isn't an amazing film, it's by no means a bad one.
Still suffers from the cringe inducing dialogue that riddled the first three though

Seeing as they're being accused of copying Christopher Nolan it's a shame that's one thing they didn't manage to copy - how fucking stupid would it look for Batman to take his mask off in the middle of a fight ? It'd ruin the fucking film. Why do they think it doesn't here ? Because Sam Raimi did it ?
They just don't get the whole tension of protecting a secret identity thing - even the 70s TV show got this bit right. It was about the only thing they did get right, but still.

I accept that a Hollywood movie will never be exactly like the comic.
I don't accept when Hollywood changes the essence of the character. Parker out-bullying the bully?
That's like high school Clark Kent taking the head of a bully and squishing it like a grape.
A few things that separate heroes from villains are self-awareness and self-control. From what I remember Spidey's always displayed both.
TROY sucked as a movie but there were a few fight scenes choreographed so well that I paid to see it again(then left right after the fight scenes).
In Spider-man I can't think of any MUST-SEE scenes again. It'd be kinda cool to see the web-slinging shots in IMAX but other than that...I, along with the rest of the audience, was more interested in the Dark Knight Rises trailers.
Superman Returns wasn't better than Superman 2 and I don't feel The Amazing Spider-man is really any better than Raimis.
Of course I didn't like Batman Begins(thanks, Katie Holmes) but loved TDK so maybe I'll love Spidey 2.
Anyone on the fence should definitely see it.

It's true that these movies are made to appeal to a mass market, and I think most people understand that and accept it.
But at the same time, the advantage these movies have is that they're using established characters. The fact that studios have that well to tap into in the first place is because of the fans who've been reading for years. They have every right to demand that what they love about the comics be honored.
What's the point of the story about your girlfriend? OK, you didn't want Gwen to know. She did. And? I dare say you might be right, people who haven't read the comics won't know the difference. Again, so what? And stop calling her your chick.

"The Amazing Spider Man" Should have been called, "Why Bother Being Original, just get that summer Cash-Man!" Plot holes up the wazoo, shitty character growth and ZERO love for the real Spidey feel.
So disappointed. Fuck you Marvel. Shoulda waited till you got it right. I want my money back.
Seriously, I can stand quite a bit of movie problems, and I can suck it up for popcorn faire, but damn, I just wanted it to be over! They're making up a shitty story line that's so shitty even they forgot about it. Seriously, the whole reason this movie started, the reason things happened, just not even mentioned after the first hour. I don't know how to even begin with this pile of turds.
I don't have any qualms with movies generally, I know it's all escapism. But damn, if I pay $14 dollars to see a movie, I expect them to remember about the bad guy they just seemed to have forgotten about an hour into the film. I mean really, you forgot about the bad guy?!?! REALLY?!?! WTF Hollywood?

Of course comic book movies would exist if comic-book "nerds" didn't! Of course comic book movies would absolutely be mainstream theater content if there was no such thing as the "nerd" obsession with comic books for 60 plus years.
Of course the same people reading Wall Street Journal love their Spidey comics! The same people picking up that 'National Enquirer' never miss that latest episode of "Ultimate X-men"! Right?
Bollocks.
Of course Avengers made more than just nerd and geek money. Of course it was made for more than just nerds and geeks.
But to pretend that we'd have an Avengers at all if there was no such thing as a comic book nerd or comic-con geek is patently absurd.
Oh and if you come on AICN and call others "nerds" or "dorks" - it's just sad. Like a giant mirror right in your face that you can't see, sad.

I was kind of hoping it would surprise me... It didn't at all. It was basically Twilight with Spider-man. Totally aimed at tweens. They really fucked up the Lizard and he's real easy to get. I hope the sequels they go a little harder. You don't have to set up the world anymore... Just go for it. Give us a solid Green Goblin. Not in a power rangers suit and not a mutated monster. Just a crazy asshole in the costume we all want.
If they kill off Gwen in either ASM2 or 3 I'll be pretty impressed.

Do you really expect someone to say
'Oh, $35mil in one day? Well then I really loved it! Forgive me for disliking the movie before I knew how much money it made!'
Who. Fucking. Cares. It's not a real argument. No one here is making a profit from it. And money is an indicator of popularity, not quality.
Popularity. Not quality.
Think of all the movies that the AICN community has collectively trashed in spite of the millions they made opening weekend.
Here is what BO intake indicates:
1)People paid money to see the movie.
2)There might be a sequel.
I liked this movie. But shut up with the BO numbers and come up with a better defense for your tastes.

oh wait...they did
and in the process, gave a reach around to every comic book geek that they could
as for your "chick", have you told her everything about your history?
cuz, i did that once with a gf...told her something about me that i knew she wouldnt like....and that was the end of the relationship
girls say all the time....be honest...BULLSHIT
parker got it right...he got to hit that,right up till he broke her fuckin neck on...THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE (romita couldnt draw the washington bridge)
thats how you end a relationship...BAM

Who are you to judge whether a character is smart? You express yourself like a moron.
Why should anybody listen to your emotional drivel?
Your use of ALL CAPS TO SCREAM YOUR OPINION AT US is just a sad attempt of a feeble mind to express itself forcibly.
It didn't work.
Go menstruate somewhere else.

Fair points on your end, and I respect them.
But I am not sure what you do not understand in my example. My lady-friend (is that a better adjective?) represented the masses, where I represented the comic-reader.
I knew the history of Spider-Man, in particular, the Gwen Stacy Saga. So I chose the direction they went (as far as her discovering that Peter is Spider-Man) as my opportunity to nit-pick the film, whereas she found it made perfect sense for those characters and within the confines of the movie.
In short, the average movie-goer or even those who read the comics as children but have put them down for anything over 10 years do not give a shit, and at the end of the day, these movies are made to appeal to a much broader audience than people who go to the comic-book store 5 times a week.
Which, like it or not, is a big reason why these movies make so much money.
Sure, the fan-base is huge, but for comic-readers to sit there and huff and puff over every little detail and become personally offended by certain aspects of these movies is laughable and downright psychotic.

Did you honestly think that this was off from the source material?
I felt it took the character that everyone knows and loves and really did a terrific job of contemporizing him.
I didn't, for one second, feel as though the source material was ignored or disrespected.
If the film gave you that vibe, so be it. But I loved Garfield as Parker and had no problems with the retelling of Spider-Man's origin.

I don't disagree with anything you're saying, it's just that the conclusion you seem to be reaching is simply that 'these stories can be told differently'. That's not necessarily the same as 'these movies are better when made for mass market' or 'these movies need to be this way in order to be successful'.
I agree that pedantic nerd outrage such as organic vs mechanical web shooters is silly. Your Gwen Stacy example, though, I wouldn't put on that level. It's great that you're OK with the change, but I would accept 'it was a huge mistake to completely erase Peter's internal struggle' as a legit complaint.

....TASM has some parts which were very well done and some which were done rather poorly. The movie looks good and is worth seeing for the parts done right (and Emma Stone).
The web shooters, which I hated the first trilogy's take on, was pretty well done.

Is the most entertainment I've had in a long time. You haters are a rare breed. First you say the movie won't make any money and compare it to Prometheus, then when the movie starts raking in the cash you complain that we should ignore box office and prove why we liked the movie. I haven't even seen it yet but I'll see it Sunday with a smile on my face knowing that this silly war continues in the talkbacks...

...that even if its a pure studio project with an amicable "yes"-man directory, it can still be a good movie.
I guess the point..and part of the whole point of this particular talkback is this:
Do we slam something before we see it based on it's pedigree or do we ignore everything but the creative output itself?
Beyond all the bitching (stop calling people nerds, nerds..I'm one, you're one, if you're AICN and ESPECIALLY if you're arguing on this thread - you're without question a nerd/geek/whatever - stop hating yourself and projecting it on us)...the end result is what really matters.
Scott Mendelson did this big write-up about how this movie should fail even if its good. His reasoning was that it would give a "green light" to all the studios who would then start pumping the reboot well so commonly and blatantly that we'd end up barely finishing a trilogy/franchise without having the reboot start up within a couple years - and that we'd end up with reboots of basically everything. And Hollywood's output would go to least common denominator hell.
While we can argue the merits of supply/demand in terms of entertainment - I think this market still speaks rather purely and is mostly incorruptible. People see what they like or don't. There's no overall industry gimmick or sleight of hand to fool people into seeing something they don't like or talking it up as good if they thought it sucked.
Some of you run with this and use box-office as a primary indicator of quality - but its more a testament to the ad campaign and word of mouth than sheer quality of entertainment. Some of you insist box-office is all but meaningless in terms of quality.
But that last piece - "word of mouth" cannot be denied. None of us would recommend a film we did not like - so word of mouth is still a valid method of measuring some degree of quality - this leads to greater box office, especially after opening weekend. Leading post-opening box-office to exhibit some degree of quality, or lack thereof, of any particular film.
The Monkees were a completely corporate creation...who eventually wrote some really good music. It may be the exception - but it is possible.

But then they purposely ignore the user ratings which is at 84% last time I looked. Movie is tracking well with moviegoers despite what trolls here are posting. Also looks to have a very successful opening week.

a contemporary spider-man? How about Ultimate Spider-man or the spectacular spider-man cartoon? both were actually spider-man and are more contemporary than some cheesy movie written by an 85 year old man. There's a reason Spidey has endured for 50 years, why change it? Garfield's Peter was boring, a shit cunt and not a great character whereas the Ultimate Spidey and Spectacular Spidey both younger versions of the current 616 Spidey are great characters that you enjoy reading stories about.
Have you ever thought that the details of the comics could have made the movie better? Of course it can, why the fuck do you think so many fans loved Avengers and all the little details it had from the comics. I'm starting to think you're related to Garfield. Who was shit by the way and has a shitty voice.

“Did you tell Peter Parker the truth about his father?”
I used to believe that "Trekkies" were the worst.
Now, I know that they're leaps and bounds above "geeks":
At least "Trekkies" can admit when a STAR TREK movie or TV show is mediocre.
"Geeks", on the other hand, will NEVER admit when a movie based on geek fandom is sub par - At best, they will faithfully market the not-even-made-yet sequel, like good little consumers.
So, thank you, geeks.
Thank you for excusing commerce and keeping us on that long road to the middle.
You have successfully ruined movies and strangled everything we love about them.
Welcome to the industry of "cool".

How many more ways do you plan on conveying your disdain for this film?
You've stated your case, time and time again, more often than not interjecting your opinions regardless of if anyone asked and attacking people without provocation.
How badly do you need attention?
Move on, man. We get it. Loud and clear. You do not like the Amazing Spider-Man.
You're also more read on the comics than anyone else around here. Kudos. I'm sure the stacks of funnybooks by your bedside impress all the ladies you bring home.
Seek help, take care.

I haven't seen the new Spiderman. I probably will eventually on DVD or something, but too soon for me to see a reboot with all my entertainment options out there to spend theater dollars on it. Nothing against people who want to see a re-do, if it's your cup of tea go for.
But what bothers me is, that since the first Spiderman movie remains the gold standard for me of the modern superhero genre (tying with Superman 2 for the all time standard), I feel like I can never get a straight answer out of anyone about whether or not this version of Spidey is good, or just well it's Spidey so it's not that bad.
Everything I hear seems to end up amounting to (or at least coming across as), "It's not nearly as good as good as the 2002 Spiderman was, but I mean it's way better than Spiderman 3!"
First off what foes that mean? I mean outside of Indiana Jones (Last Crusade) and the 007 movies (if you really count them all as sequels) can you name any series where the third installment lived up? After a couple of tries you run our of ways to top yourself and it becomes problematic to explore a character in a way you already haven't. Of course several years break from the material and being allowed to rehash basic character elements is going to be better than, "Well let's have the same hero fight a different gimmick baddie this time."
Second off, Spiderman 3 isn't nearly as bad as remembered. I just rewatched it earlier this week on cable. When i first saw it I remember being disappointed, mainly cause I'm a cliche guy who likes Venom as my favorite Spidey character and I felt he was all gimmick and no character in the movie. But with a second watch that's not the case. Spidey3 suffers from Star Wars prequel syndrome - without the super high expectations when you rewatch several years later it's a perfectly entertaining film in a fun world with the same basic themes as the first movies.
Anyways, having turned a short story long: Please people stop reviewing "Amazing Spidey" as a great movie by saying it's better than S3. Just tell me how it is on it's own since it's supposed to be a redo. If you feel compelled to compare to the other movies (hard not to, I get it), than stick to comparing side by side Spidey/Amazing Spidey origin story efforts. It feels too much like you're a Marvel fanboy trying to defend an unnecessary remake if you have to say, "Well ignore Spiderman, but it's way better than Spiderman 3."
Though, yes. It is perfectly fine for you to like Amazing Spidey even if you thought 2002 Spidey was better. It is okay to like them both. Just give me an hones review and not a justifying one.

"The Amazing Spider-Man" ($64 million) - Word of mouth so far suggests more "unneeded reboot" than exciting franchise start. Film will easily win weekend, but will fade much quicker than past "Spider Man" entries.

I was expecting a by-the-numbers big studio bloated CGI mess, but Sony took their time and made a good movie. I watched the 2002 Spider-man on Thursday night and the new one on Friday, and I was stunned at how much this reboot stomps all over the original. I love Sam Raimi's work (I think I have four versions of Army of Darkness), but Sony and Marc Webb impressed me. The movie isn't perfect, but it vastly exceeded my expectations. They hit all the vital story beats and the casting of so many good actors in supporting roles really helped.

I don't like Garfield as an actor so that didn't help, but about the only thing I really liked was Emma Stone.
I really liked the Raimi movies, and I think even #3 is much better than most people say, its the sort of movie that would go from so-so to great if they had fixed just 4-5 things. But at least those movies were fun and colourful and didn't go for dark and brooding.

I kept waiting for that to be a plot point, it seemed odd, I've never been to NYC but I presume there are not geekos and iguanas liberally roaming the streets and sewers in herds, but I might be wrong.

I didn't expect it to be good, but I never thought it was going to be that terrible. Horrible script, horrible editing, horrible spiderman suit, out dated cgi, and horrible directing. Not since Batman and Robin have I seen that many good actors look that terrible in one movie.

uncle ben and aunt may never seem like their really related to Peter Parker. Gwen Stacy never really seems to be into Peter Parker. Everything seemed like the actors were just forcing their lines. You never felt any connections between the characters

I have now seen this film for the second time. Strip the eye candy out and what we have is still the confused mess of styles that have made this movie so divisive with audiences. At this screening the end was met with equal numbers of 'that was crap' and 'that was awesome' comments. I see how it is possible that some will be amazed by this film and i can see how some will be angered by it.
The major problem remains what motivates spider-man simply to be spider-man say what you will about Raimi it may be the one thing he truly nailed. This film presents us with a more believable love story with a on screen chemistry that beautiful to see. I felt there was more story here and that Webb had filmed a better film than appears in this cut. I felt uneasy with the pacing of the development of the Curt Connors character there were times when it felt comfortable and rushed other times. I feel that a slower pace would have given a more poignancy to the climax
On that note SPOILER connors character transforming between lizard(evil( and connors (good) would have made an interest and compelling plot point. Connors crying out for help in the heat of the battle would have given this conflict it's correct context showing Peter reluctant to hurt connors while suppressing the lizard. This would have ensured that connors heroic act to save peter means more than it did
So I am conflicted by the box office on this while I am not as angry as when I first saw it I still feel there was an opportunity to hit a home run here that was disappointingly missed.

Is it me .. or could you have made the Lizard in this movie, black, with an organic "skin" ala black spidey .. and have Venom? The jaw was similar to most renderings of Venom, the tongue, while not exact, was like Venom and even "claws" like Venom ... granted .. no tail
But what I mean is .. and people can yell at me for this .. but to me, it felt like they TRIED to do Venom, something didn't work and they went with Lizard ...
Am I crazy here? .. early CG test for venom gone bad, re-skin and add tail ... voila Lizard?

I agree with you...except for the notion about CAPTAIN AMERICA. I actually enjoyed that film.
The rest of the films on your list were a waste of admission and popcorn.
This move was better than all of those films on your list...and it was at least as good as CAPTAIN AMERICA.

...It's basically an overly expensive teen movie.
Whereas Raimi's Spider-Man was geared towards a broader audience while wrapping the movie in blue collar sensibilities and nodding towards all the old school diehard fans, Webb's Spider-Man is just a teen popcorn movie.
And there's nothing wrong with that, it's just not gonna bowl a moviegoer like me over. There's some clever stuff in the movie, like the burning car hanging from the bridge or the spiderweb in the sewer junction, but otherwise it's just another teen movie.
Even for all of its massive flaws, it's actually a good movie. At least not a bad movie. Certainly not a great movie by any stretch of the imagination. But a good, simple popcorn movie to see if you're out and about.

...Why the fuck am I even ON this website? There's SO many other websites that link to movie-fandom related material...and it doesnt even have this fat fuck giving
SHITTY P.C. MOVIE REVIEWS Just to Keep his lips on Hollywood's ass so he'll be more agreeable and get more swag....
Why the fuck Am I still coming to this stupid fucking site?
Fuck this Im out.

To hell with the haters. I've been waiting for a Spider-Man movie that has the 'feel' right and everything about this movie was on the money. Hats of to Garfield, he IS Peter Parker.
More, please. Ignore these cartoon neck-beards and their snarky Internet bile.

The marketing department knew they were in trouble and threw everything they can in the trailers to get people to see the movie... At the risk of spoilers... and showing the money shots... INCLUDING the post credits scene!!!
Only movies that have been assessed by marketing and focus groups, as to not having a chance of a successful run in the theaters, get the THROW EVERY SHOT FROM THE 3RD ACT trailers...
Or in simple speaks... A hail Mary pass.

Can't understand why you'd give one of the biggest movie franchises on the planet to someone like Marc Webb. Seems like a huge risk...and unfortunately for them, it failed.
It might have had an OK opening 6 days, but the shitty word of mouth will have it fizzle out quickly, and then worst of all, no one is going to be excited about the sequel.
Why is it such a hard concept? Pay good people to make good movies, and make the most money...morons.

Garfield nailed Peter Parker? Define Parker for us. Which period, which writer? Show some knowledge of Spider-Man comic history, any of your favourite creators or stories. You won't cos your a plant. Even your name stinks of plant. nobody would call themselves 'super joker' unless they were paid to quickly say 'Loved This Film' on AICN. Or say why you chose that name. Over to you planty-pants x

Only seen it once but was very impressed. I was struck by the great chemistry between Garfield and Stone. Fantastic sfx and great action scenes. It may be premature, but I would probably say it was better than Raimi's pts. 1 and 3 and maybe equal to 2. A solid reboot with some fine performances. Looking forward to more adventures with this cast!

Wrapped in super-hero nonsense. It was however geared toward teens of the 1960's, and as such was kinda hokey. Raimi captured the cheesy stuff perfectly, but didn't move toward really updating the character and in some ways just pissed all over it.
<P>
At least this version keeps the smart, science minded Peter Parker which the original only payed lip-service to. The motivations also feel more rooted this time around, and the characters feel like they occupy the present time then some carry over from the 1960's America.

Yeah tell that to Gwen Stacy and Kraven The Hunter.
And the movie really wasn't that dark. It just wasn't the cartoony cheese-fest that Raimi's trilogy were.
The Amazing Spider-Man was not without it's problems but it was pretty damn good. Good onscreen chemistry, good acting and dialog that didn't have me rolling my eyes every 5 minutes. I didn't like having to sit thru the origin again, and the "pre-determined destiny" road has me a little worried (didn't work for Ang Lee's Hulk)...but NOTHING was as lame in this outing as "Power Rangers" Green Goblin or III's (not one, not two but) THREE song and dance routines.
It took re-watching II and III on FX to realize it, but while The Amazing Spider-Man wasn't "great", it's the best Spider-Man movie that's been made yet. I'm pretty pumped to see what they do with the sequels.

So Harry had no issue with the way they screwed with the original George Stacy comic speech which is one of the great spidey moments of all time. The "promise me..." crap was the complete opposite of the originals intent which had that great "he knew" moment as opposed to the stupid scene in the street. It's a decent flick but some glaring flaws. My kids liked it they call Garfield the "funny Spider-man".

How was the character updated when he is carrying around a camera from late 70's/early 80's and over sized glasses which went by the way side in the early nineties. That's not updating, that's being completely unrealistic. No modern teenager is going to be wearing oversized glasses or carrying a camera around that is 30 years old. What that shows is that Marc Webb can't transition from the independent movie to a Hollywood movie. There a lot of good independent movies the past 5 years, but there is always a glowing distraction in those movies. And that is things from the 70's. These independent directors like putting these in their movies because that's the decade they were kids. And 500 days was one of those kinds of movies. The characters were wearing 70's clothes in a modern day movie.
The only pissing that happen was Marc Webb pissing all over what the character of Peter Parker/Spiderman has been over the years.

You obviously haven't been privy to the unfortunate creatures called hipsters, and their influence on kids/fashion/pop culture (including "independent" film) in general. It is totally plausible that a kid in 2012 in NYC would own "vintage" glasses, cars, musical instruments, and yes....wait for it...a nice vintage camera! Because anything from the 70's and 80's is cool. And yes, there are people here in 2012 that in fact do dress like the characters in 500 Days...I see it everyday in Silverlake/LA...
The Garfield/Webb take on Peter Parker is the best we've gotten so far.

Hipster's are in the mid 20 to late 30 range, and make up a very small percentage of mid 20 to late 30 population. So no they don't have an influence on teenagers. And yes wait for it, teenagers don't carry around 30 year old cameras or wear oversized glasses like some adult hipster douchebags. Adult hipsters (which are what age range hipsters are) may rummage around antique stores for cameras they no longer make film for. A teenager now a days would be taking pictures with their phone or digital camera.
The Webb take was horrible. Horrible editing, plot lines abandoned throughout the movie, horrible cgi, horrible score, horrible directing, and forced acting.

As someone who makes his living in education and is around high school students practically daily I have to let you know you are just wrong. Period. I see kids wearing that kind of stuff all the time. Cool kids and kids who just wanna fit in (nerd?). And owning a vintage camera that he probably got on eBay is totally plausible. Many "real" photographers still prefer old technology/film. Fact bro.
Also as an old fart who has been reading/collecting Spider-Man since the mid 70's, I know that Parker has had different "phases" in his personality...but the consistant trait has always been that he's a somewhat socially awkward loner....and this movie nailed that. That stereotypical "nerd" Parker didn't really last past Ditko.
The CGI was spotty in parts (mainly the Lizard) but it shits all over Raimi's movies. Go watch 'em again. It didn't age well...not even III.
I thought the score was different but good although it didn't have a singular, memorable Spidey "theme"....it wasn't your typical ape-ing Williams/Elfman stuff.
And what plot lines were "abandoned"? Did you read that in a review somewhere? Keep in mind it's part one of a trilogy.
This movie doesn't deserve the hate it's getting from little twats like you. Go defend organic web-shooter or Power Ranger Goblin...or go rub one out to Raimi's Saturday Night Fever "montage"....hope that works out for you.

The over-sized glasses: he found them in his father's belongings and started wearing them to feel more connected to his father. They even show him pulling out his contacts.
<P>
The Film Camera: I kind of agree here, but there are plenty of kids, especially in the city who love photography and are purists. Maybe he is too. No one bothered to get into the conversation with him.
<P>
Also you bitches keep screaming about hipsters, but have you ever been to New York City? That's what kids look like. If you want to get your panties into a bunch, you can bemoan the fact that Andrew Garfield is almost 30 years old, and if they want to do two more films in the trilogy tradition, he'll likely be pushing 40.

Ok..maybe not "genius" genius but he is just about the kewlest celeb on the planet at the moment...guy dons the entire real-deal Hellboy make-up to go and hang out with a little kid with leukemia (they also did the kid up with his own Hellboy getup).
We're talking the 4 hours plus makeup process just like in the movies and he goes and spends the day with the kid. And he's like 62 years old!
Perlman is the stuff of legend folks...the stuff of legend!!!

Saw this with my gf last saturday night. I'm a huge spidey fan, my fandom originating from the 90's cartoon transcending into videogames and the occasional comic(!). I really love the Raimi movies and have seen each multiple times. I still have a hard time picking a favorite. I know 3 is regarded rather poorly but being a Venom fan I was still grinning madly when he appeared on screen. You gotta start somewhere right? I'm keeping my fingers crossed for the spin-off.
Back on topic, I felt Tobey was a great Peter Parker, Whereas Garfield puts a lot of humanity in his Peter, Tobey put in a lot of emotion, brought exactly how I want it in a Raimi movie.
Back on Amazing:
The suit looked marvelous, sneakers and everything. Villain was really undeveloped but I felt he just wasn't the focus in this movie. Power Ranger Costume aside, GG was an interesting arc in the Raimi movies. Webb has yet to build up any realy type of threat for Spidey.
I thought the Peter / Aunt May scene near the end was a great homage to the source material.
All in all I was really happy with the movie and hope the sequel will provide a bigger (sense of!)threat and I wouldn't mind having the likes of Mysterio or Kraven grace the screen. I'm kinda hoping they won't go GG to soon. The early parts of Amazing were a bit to deja vu for me as the original trilogy is still quite recent.
BTW I recommend the videogame on xbox. The story reminded me a lot of the 90's cartoon with Smythe's! Spider Slayers! There is a 'cross-species spider-man' costume that you can unlock that really unnerves me... I love man-spider but the in-game skin reminds me a lot of the groceness of the Fly.

The formula that the Lizard was using to become the Lizard, wore-off on its own in a few hours, many times during the movie, so by infecting the entire population with it at the end of the movie would have worn-off in a few hours in anybody infected with it. There was no need for an "antidote" to cure those folks!
Just another huge plot hole in a bad movie.

Dr. Connors upped the potency/dosage for a more permanent effect....it was addressed in that pesky part where they talk....dialog or something like that.
Kids in NYC and LA do dress like that...move outta the sticks Gomer...
Are you douche-nozzles really that fucking dense?
-A proud 'Mmerican

I loved this movie. I'm glad it was rebooted. Raimi's were cheesy fun, but I enjoyed this Spider-Man so much better. I like this Peter Parker - he seems like a real person, not some cartoonish stereotype. And the plot was way tighter. The aerial ballet, especially in 3D, was great.
I don't give a shit about reboots. 3 movies should be the limit with one set of actors and a director. (Nolan has the right idea). Comics "reboot" all the time. So what's the difference. I like seeing different takes on the same material. Bring on this trilogy. Then do another with a different director and actors.
haterz will hate.

July 10, 2012, 3:04 a.m. CST

by W3bzpinn3r

I blame the studio, the producers.......because Raimi did great with the first 2.........He originally had other plans with SM 3.......but since he didnt understand Venom and some other attributes.......we got the shit we got

Dang it... It deleted my commentary.... ok.... short version this time...
Raimi got Venom perfect. Brock was spot on, as a whiny, horrible loser. Looked great too, even though he could use a little more muscle, but they went for the Bagley look rather than McFarlane... ok...
Where Raimi screwed the pooch was short-changing the black suit drama for stupid Sandman moments with a daughter no one cared about, and the drama with Snaggle-Tooth MJ. I WANTED MJ to die in SM3. She was horribly self-centered, and just a drama queen.
Instead of the pelvic thrusts and jazz scene, Raimi should have showed the aggression building in Spider-Man, due to the symbiote - have a montage of him whuppin' on bikers, thrashing Shocker, etc. Spidey should have "killed" Sandman in the sewer and freak out. He goes to the church to think about what he did, and he starts talking to himself, and realizes he's talking to the suit. It freaks him out, and he decides to get rid of it. After Spidey beats Venom, and the credits roll, THEN run the scene with Sandman coming out of the mud, wanting revenge (and so purists won't be pissy about Spidey "killing" someone)

Besides Emma Stone being adorable....
SHE ACTUALLY HAS VALUE! Kirsten Dunst's MJ was a HORRIBLE character. EVERYTHING about her since the first film was all "me, me, me". She used Harry, She left John at the altar, and she was a total bitch in SM3... and in all three movies, she was the worthless damsel in distress, without contributing one single thing to the film.
Gwen on the other hand was beautiful, smart, kind, AND contributed to defeating the badguy, and just when you think she's about to be the classic damsel in distress, The Lizard ignores her and moves on.
Raimi set the tone wrong for his trilogy with the first line of the first film "This is the story about a girl. The girl next door." It's NOT. Spider-Man was NEVER about a girl, either Gwen or MJ. It was, and always will be, about balancing great power, with multiple responsibilities. "Amazing" got it right. Raimi didn't.
Raimi's Spider-Man's actions were saving MJ first, and just coincidentally saving the city. In Amazing, at the bridge, when he saved the kid, it dawns on him that his role in life is to protect the city. Raimi's Spider-Man never had that moment. For him, it was always a "get the girl" story.

I think plot and character points were rushed. It kind of seemed a bit.. yeah yeah we know, we just have to have some of it to move on.
I think the film would have been better if it was longer.
However when the film is good, it was really good. Really entertaining. It got everything spot on except for rushing story and character in bits.

At least for this fan, anyway. Spidey 1 and 2 were light-hearted and fun. People complained that Spidey didn't have enough of his trademark wisecracks in those films. But Raimi made up for this by adding humor in other characters and situations (for instance, J.K. Simmons's performance as Jameson).
There was hardly any joy in watching ASM - it was a mechanical exercise that felt too dark and downbeat, clearly influenced by Nolan's Batman.

There's a million ways to approach this shit, and they did a decent job with it. It's not like Amazing Spiderman comic is the epitome of fucking literature, either. It's a great story but come on. It has and always will be kind of silly.

Full review posted below, but I agree with the people saying the first two Spider-movies were tonally spot on. This just felt messy and ill-judged to me.
http://mondayonmymind.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/amazing-spider-man-review.html

Sometimes i wonder what Fans expect of a movie,, really ive seen the negative against this Film and for sumone who grew up on spidey comics,, They nailed it..Straight Up Garfield is SOO much better than Tobey, Yea the 1st spiderman movie was Good and while 2 was an almost retelling of "SuperMan 2" It was still the best of Raimis Bunch, But im All in for the future of this Franchise, for me the movie wasnt long enough..I wanted more and more of Stacey, Of Parker..Great Chemistry and still the best Scene in Any Spiderman movie ..(the bridge scene with the boy and spideys mask) Just a Great film!! and My Favorite of the summer so far!!!

All i could think as i walked out of the theatre is about how mad i was at all the fucking nerds hating on this film. It wasn't perfect, but it was perfectly great. We should be so god damned lucky that we get 4 spiderman films 10 years, and that the reboot pretty much addressed everything that wasn't working with the Rami films. This one KILLS the previous 3. I have anti-nerd nerd-rage. I don't want to be a nerd anymore. I want to learn how to play football and wedgie all these fuckers.

Having seen all 4 Spidey films, I'm having a hard time with this version.
While the acting was all good. The movie just seemed flat.
While it was good, the pacing just seemed just there. Some of it was the soundtrack I believe.
I saw this movie in 2D and really had no desire to see it in 3D.
While the film entertains and is enjoyable, It's missing something...for me. Perhaps it was the ending.
Perhaps I've been spoiled with Avengers, Iron Man, TDK, etc etc.

The film was so vanilla. I know producers love to comb these threads from time to time... be more original if you take another whack at the franchise. Hell, adapt the "Edge of Time" video game.... take the plot line.
Andrew Garfield for Peter Parker.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Miguel O'Hara.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0b-zoPa0UO4&feature=related

I, personally, know of two that actually comb through talk backs... that is if the talk backs are related to their project. Why do they? It felt to me they do it merely for anecdotal reasons. So, I just wanted to throw the idea out into the ether... in case there are others. My typing and grammar may be way off... I pulled an all niter to complete a project for a client.

"if you are not a plant, please elaborate as to WHY you actually liked it, please provide details and not simple "it's better than Raimi's" or "love everything about it"
The character of Peter Parker is much more intricate and authentic. I know, I know, geeks get intimidated by charismatic people, but Peter was a confident dude. He stood up for the weaklings even before he got his powers. He flirted with the girls he liked.. even before he got his powers.
The Rami films felt like a satirized version of exactly what was in the comics. This one has Peter obsessed with finding his uncle's killer. AND HE NEVER FINDS HIM. That's life dude. Life doesn't end with threads tied. And that's what makes this a real movie.
If you took, "spider-man" out of the Rami films, you'd have nothing left. Unlikable, wining little bitches, and melodrama. It really did feel like it was written in the 60s and not in a good way.
In Webb's film, without spiderman, you'd still have the characters of Peter, Gwen, Ben and May to enjoy, let alone Captain Stacey.
Sure, the villain may have been meh, but so was Eric Bana in Star Trek. Still loved it.
The ending was perfect. It had the tragedy of the comics, with the poetry of the Peter's last line about his promises.
Maybe you guys need the flash and dash of films like the Avengers, with it's crowd sourced pandering (I loved the character work, the rest was like any transformers film).
The biggest problem of the Rami film was that Spider man and Green Goblin were created at the exact same time - for no reason. At least here they tied the Lizard and spider-man together.
The tone was pitch perfect as far as i was concerned. Light, with darkness. EXACTLY how it was in the comics. Gwen Stacy fucking dies at spiderman's hand in the comics. How dark is that??? What about the scene when spiderman is looking over "his" city and gets the call for organic eggs from aunt may? None of that shit was in the rami versions.
This film IS the comics. The Rami version is spiderman by commitee and EXACTLY what you get when you listen to forum posters.

in the comics as i remember them, he was constantly promising to give up being spiderman, then changing his mind.
It was incredibly well done in the film, and that line was one of my favorites. He realized he was hurting her even more by not being with her.
Also, because teenager.

So I saw it. What a boring, badly-written mess. And royally fucks up Peter Parker, hey have him laughing about breaking his promise to a dying man to keep out of his daughters pants, oh and why is he dead? Because the stupid script had Spider-Man think it was safe to leave him and his little shotgun alone with THE BIG HUGE LIZARD-MONSTER THAT WILL NOT DIE. Garbage. Rotten stinking garbage.

I fell asleep for 20 mins half way through, originally I was indifferent then on a second viewing I found it boring.
For what Raimi got right this gets wrong and for what Raimi got wrong they get right, unfortunately theres more wrongs than right in ASM.
They've also taken a cue from Marvel in mixing universes and taking things from the Ultimate version. Love the web shooters, the classic Spidey poses, swinging and fighting was there, Gwen and Peter worked better than Peter and MJ.
The Lizard sucked, Connors sucked, this is a tragic Jekyll and Hyde character yet after his first transformation he went all mad scientist, that just didnt work for me at all, plus the Lizard CGI and design was crap.
The underwhelming death of Uncle Ben, the whole out on revenge and not confronting his killer was just bollocks, it just had no weight to it at all.
The way Capt Stacey was killed off and Peters treatment of Gwen afterwards just didnt quite do it due to the lack of depth to Uncle Bens death.
The untold story of his parents lasting maybe 5 minutes of the film, yet it was a selling point for the movie.
It was also trying to hard to be dark and like Nolans Batman, trying to fuse Spider-Man and Nolans real world vision just didnt work at all and felt forced and unnecessary.
It was blatant that this movie was rushed to keep the licence, isnt there a legal loophole for Marvel to get its character back like these rush jobs etc are having a detrimental effects on its characters?

Are there any other buildings in the middle of New York that Spider-Man can't swing to without crane-operators who work at night?
Will they always be there when he needs them?
Do footballs bend metal at high speed?
Do high-school students not notice someone repeatedly showing they have super-powers?
Would you write 'property of Peter Parker' on your camera if you were photographing yourself as Spider-Man?
Why exactly are you taking photos of yourself anyway?
Do lizards live in NYC sewers?
If you want to convince the police that a scientist is a giant lizard monster, why not bring some proof? There was a lizard-mouse right there.
If you get shot in the leg, does it just sort of heal?
Should you leave an old man with an ineffective shotgun alone with a giant lizard monster that will not die?
Is it ok to laugh as you intend to break the promise you made to a dying man if you really really really want to bone his daughter?

How much access does a major bio-chemical experimental facility give a 17 year old intern?
Hello Captain Stacy, perhaps you should've brought a SWAT team with you instead of that old shotgun?
Do Police Captains have shotguns? Or tiny apartments?
First date, fish supper with the girl's family? Really?
We're not supposed to laugh that she tempts him with fish, right?
So Peter was wearing his web-shooter when he pulled Gwen toward him?
Seriously Pete, you never thought of googling your father before?

How much did you really want that chocolate milk? What are you, seven?
You don't have the funds Parker - you don't get discounted dairy just cos your all upset, ok?
Why not steal it like you did the web-fluid?

So I'm late to catch this one in the Theater, I did get to see it in IMAX, Thankfully.
There were no doubt some great action sequences but I left the theater somewhat underwhelmed.
So we get a wise-ass Spidey who's a bit mean spirited...not really "fun"-funny y'know ? , mechanical web shooter's which are great but he never runs out of webbing (?), AND we have to sit through all of that origin story BullShit...
Flash Thompson is the Big Ass Kicking Bully at school but as the movie progresses he pops in here & there so by the end he's a total friend-sweetheart LAME!
I know Andrew Garfield is getting great reviews but I didn't think he was all that great in this role. I liked Emma Stone & Denis Leary was awesome.
I couldn't help feeling the scenes between Peter & Gwen were forced... I just didn't buy it for some reason... a little too cutesy and overacted.
And don't get me started on the crane operators scene, I know a lot of people bag Sam Raimi for the scene in Spidey 1 w/ the New Yorkers on the bridge taking on the Green Goblin but the crane operators....Geeesh ! That was Awful.
And lastly, The 3D was pretty cool, they certainly made you feel like you got your money's worth with the swinging scenes and the web shooting but it also exposed how bad the CGI was, especially with The Lizard.
I was really surprised at the good reviews , I was hoping to Love this film. When I walked out of Spider-Man back in 2002, I felt like it was awesome, not perfect but fun, action packed and it had heart.
I could actually care less to see this again.
Of course Harry is going to give it a decent review b/c he's Avi Arad's buddy and I'm sure he gets all sorts of goodies from him but really... was it that Amazing ?

the 3D was incredibly weak,
the score for amazing was sub par compared to the original trilogy.
i liked kristen dunst much better than the blond.
overall just a bland reboot done way too soon.
a movie shouldnt be rebooted until 50+ years after its done like the thing and the fly were (carpenters the thing my fav remake).
they try to give spiderman funny lines and make him more animated but its painfully unfunny and not witty, they needed the iron man writers or something to write comic bits.

missed the Raimi ones after watching this. The action was better here...but the whole thing felt soulless and very calculated. Garfield was closer to the comics, but I found Tobeys goofball to be more likeable in the end.
Funny really, as I always disliked the cartoony action in the Raimi films...I wanted more scope, more vertigo, more realism to the fights. I wanted the majesty of what Spider-Man does to be captured.
As an armchair movie director, I always thought if I were directing a Spidey movie i'd put a sunset/skyscraper in there, and i'd put a 1st person sequence.
Got all that in spades...but ASM was just missing something.

ignoring the obvious."But how many other Democrats are going to to <h1><a href="http://www.cheapggbags.com">gucci outlet nj</a></h1> to be willing to see serious reform as part of
discussion?'Zero Dark Thirty': Bin Laden Manhunt Film Based on Controversial Controversial <h3><a href="http://www.cheapggbags.com">gucci outlet nj</a></h3> Controversial First-Hand Accounts: 'Nightline' ExclusiveKathryn Bigelow's New Movie Had an
'Mission Failed' EndingBy MARTHA RADDATZ and ELY BROWNNov. 26, 2012&#151; 2012&#151; <i><b><a href="http://www.cheapdesignerbags-2u.com">cheap designer handbags</a></b></i> 2012&#151; It was the greatest manhunt of all time, the
nighttime raid by the elite SEAL Team Six on Osama Osama <h3><a href="http://www.cheapdesignerbags-2u.com">replica designer handbags</a></h3> Osama bin Laden's compound in Pakistan, which led to the
of the world's most wanted terrorist leader.It is the subject subject <i><b><a href="http://www.cheaplouboutinshoes-outlet.com">cheap Christian Louboutin</a></b></i> subject of "Zero Dark Thirty," a riveting new film by
Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal, both of Oscar-winning "The "The <h2><a href="http://www.cheaplouboutinshoes-outlet.com">replica Christian Louboutin</a></h2> "The Hurt Locker" fame. But when they began making a
about the hunt for bin Laden six years ago, right right <u><a href="http://www.cheapdesignerbags-2u.com">cheap designer handbags</a></u> right after they finished "The Hurt Locker," the movie they
in mind was about the failed attempt to find bin bin <u><a href="http://www.cheapdesignerbags-2u.com">knockoff designer handbags</a></u> bin Laden in the Tora Bora mountains of Afghanistan.That plan
drastically on May 1, 2011 when bin Laden was killed. killed. <b><a href="http://www.cheaplouboutinshoes-outlet.com">cheap louboutins</a></b> killed. Boal, a meticulous investigative reporter, picked up the phone
started working his sources."It was a thrilling journey to go go <i><a href="http://www.cheapdesignerbags-2u.com">cheap designer handbags</a></i> go on and also thrilling to discover what the people
were involved in this mission were really like," Boal said.In said.In <b><a href="http://www.cheapdesignerbags-2u.com">cheap designer handbags</a></b> said.In an exclusive interview with "Nightline," Bigelow and Boal talked